United States Naval Aviation 1919-1941

United States NavalAviation, 1919–1941

ALSO BY E.R. JOHNSON

AND FROM MCFARLAND

American Flying Boats and Amphibious Aircraft:An Illustrated History (2010)

American Attack Aircraft Since 1926 (2008)

United States NavalAviation, 1919–1941

Aircraft, Airships and ShipsBetween the Wars

E.R. JOHNSON

McFarland & Company, Inc., PublishersJefferson, North Carolina, and London

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Johnson, E.R., 1948–United States naval aviation, 1919–1941 :

aircraft, airships and ships between the wars /E.R. Johnson.

p. cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-7864-4550-9softcover : 50# alkaline paper

1. United States. Navy—Aviation—History—20th century.2. Airplanes, Military—United States—History—20th century.

3. Military airships—United States—History—20th century.4. Aeronautics, Military—United States—History—20th century.

I. Title.VG93.J627 2011 359.9'4097309042—dc22 2011006978

BRITISH LIBRARY CATALOGUING DATA ARE AVAILABLE

© 2011 E.R. Johnson. All rights reserved

No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any formor by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopyingor recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,

without permission in writing from the publisher.

Front cover: from top Rigid Airship USS Macon ZRS-5 in ¡935;Martin T4M-1 attached to VT-2B of the Saratoga Air Group in 1931;Vought OS2U-1 sited on a Type P-6 catapult in ¡940 (Lloyd S. Jones)

Manufactured in the United States of America

McFarland & Company, Inc., PublishersBox 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640

www.mcfarlandpub.com

All three-view illustrations are by Lloyd S. Jones. All photographs are courtesy David W. Ostrowski,

unless otherwise noted.

Contents

Preface 1

Introduction: Influences That ShapedNaval Aviation, 1919–1941 3

PART I: HEAVIER-THAN-AIR DEVELOPMENT 9

PART II: LIGHTER-THAN-AIR DEVELOPMENT 241

PART III: AVIATION-RELATED SHIP DEVELOPMENT 267

Between pages 298 and 299 are 8 color platescontaining 40 images

Appendix 1: Foreign Aircraft and Airships 299

Appendix 2: Racing and Experimental Aircraft 312

Appendix 3: Naval Aircraft, Airship, Ship, andAviation Unit Designations, Nomenclature,

and Abbreviations 319

Appendix 4: Status of Naval Aviation, December 1941 322

Glossary of Naval and Aeronautical Terms 324

Bibliography 329

Index 331

v

This page intentionally left blank

Preface

1

By June 1942, within six months of Japan’s devastating attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S.Navy had checked the Japanese military advance in the Pacific to the extent that the UnitedStates could return to its original war plan of defeating Germany first. That the Navy was ableto accomplish this with six fleet aircraft carriers—two of which were based in the Atlantic atthe time—and little more than 1,000 combat aircraft was not a miracle or simply a matter ofluck but the culmination of more than 20 years of determined preparation. This book explainsand illustrates, in terms of individual aircraft, airship, and ship development, the process oftrial and error that ultimately enabled naval aviation to succeed in those critical, early monthsof the war. The book is introduced by a historical summary listing the major influences thatshaped the course of naval aviation during the period.

For organizational purposes, the book is divided into three main parts. Part I covers heav-ier-than-air development in chronological order, subdivided by attack aircraft, fighter aircraft,observation and scout aircraft, patrol aircraft, and trainer, transport, and utility aircraft. Part IIcovers lighter-than-air development in chronological order, subdivided by rigid airships (diri-gibles) and non-rigid airships (blimps). Part III covers aviation-related ship development inchronological order, subdivided by aircraft carriers, seaplane and airship tenders, and sea plane-equipped warships. With the exception of seaplane-equipped warships, each sub division is pre-ceded by a procurement synopsis to summarize and interrelate the chronology of events.Supplementing the main parts are four appendices: foreign aircraft and airships in chronologicalorder; racing and experimental aircraft in chronological order; aircraft, airship, ship and aviationunit designations, nomenclature, and abbreviations; and status of naval aviation in December1941. A glossary of aviation terms follows.

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction: Influences That ShapedU.S. Naval Aviation, 1919 –1941

“Naval aviation cannot take the offensive from the shore; it must go to sea onthe back of the fleet.... The fleet and naval aviation are one and inseparable.”

—Rear Admiral William A. Moffett, first chief of theNaval Bureau of Aeronautics, 1921–1933.

3

World War I

At the time the United States entered World War I in April1917, Naval Aviation, both within the U.S. Navy and the U.S.Marine Corps, was little more than a vestigial organization,then consisting of 54 aircraft and 48 pilots. Nineteen monthslater, in November 1918, it had grown to a force of 2,107 aircraftand 15 airships, with 6,716 officers and 30,693 enlisted per -sonnel in Navy units, and 282 officers and 2,180 enlisted per-sonnel in Marine units. Even after the inevitable postwar down-sizing of the fleet, Naval Aviation managed to emerge from theprocess as an important force in being, which, by 1920, stillmaintained a strength of about 850 aircraft and 30 airships inNavy units, with another 88 aircraft allocated to the Marines.Though Naval Aviation would not regain and surpass its 1918force levels for another 23 years, World War I had neverthelessleft behind a strong foundation upon which a postwar aviationestablishment could be built.

Naval Treaties of 1922, 1930, and 1936

The disarmament of Germany after World War I left GreatBritain with the largest navy in the world, the United States aclose second, Japan third, France fourth, and Italy fifth. In orderto avoid a repeat of the unrestrained naval arms race that hadtaken place both before and throughout the war, these five na-tions met in Washington, D.C., in late 1921 to negotiate a treatyplacing limits on existing and future naval armaments. TheWashington Naval Treaty, signed by the five participants inFebruary 1922 and ratified by the U.S. government in June 1923,established an allowable ratio (expressed in thousands of tonsdisplacement) between Great Britain, the United States, Japan,France, and Italy of 5:5:3:1:1 with regard to “capital ships,”which included battleships and battlecruisers.

Of great future significance to Naval Aviation, a similar

ratio extended to construction of aircraft carriers: Britain andthe U.S., 135,000 tons each; Japan, 81,000 tons; and France andItaly, 60,000 tons each. Although the offensive capability ofcarriers was largely untested at the time of the treaty, Britainalready had two with a third nearing completion, and the U.S.and Japan each had one. Faced with controlling the largestocean areas (the Atlantic and the Pacific in the case of Britainand the U.S.), these three nations originally viewed carriers asa means to broaden fleet reconnaissance and spot for the bigguns of capital ships, with secondary emphasis on the strikerole, and perhaps as important, all three had battleships or battlecruisers under construction, otherwise illegal under thetreaty, which could be completed as carriers (i.e., Britain—Eagle, Courageous, and Glorious; U.S.—Lexington and Sara -toga; and Japan—Akagi and Kaga). Although reconnaissancewould remain a vital carrier function, the U.S. and Japan, to amuch greater extent than Britain, afterward used their new car-riers to evolve multi-mission capabilities such as anti-carriertactics, attacks on shore bases, and support of amphibious as-saults.

Of related significance, the Washington Treaty, thoughlimiting new cruiser construction to a maximum displacementof 10,000 tons and gun armament of 8 inches, placed no restric-tion on tonnage, thereby triggering a cruiser construction “race”be tween the five participating powers. Continuing negotiationsthrough the 1920s led to adoption of the London Naval Treatyof 1930, which made a distinction between gun armament of“heavy” cruisers (up to 8 inches) and “light” cruisers (up to 6.1inches) and set limits on both the tonnage and number of shipsallowed: Britain, 339,000 tons/15 heavy cruisers; U.S., 323,500tons/18 heavy cruisers; and Japan, 208,850 tons/12 heavy cruis-ers. Between 1929 and 1939, applying this formula, the U.S.Navy placed 27 new “treaty” cruisers in commission—18 heavy,9 light—each of which was equipped to handle two or morefloatplane scouts. Added to this were the 19 remaining battle-

ships (16 after 1930), 10 pre-treaty light cruisers, and two gun-boats, so that by 1939 the fleet possessed 55 warships operatingapproximately 170 floatplanes between them.

The final treaty, the Second London Treaty of 1936, madeno important changes except for an “escalator clause,” invokedafter Japan refused to sign the treaty, that allowed the armamentof two planned U.S. battleships (i.e., BB-55 and -56) to be in-creased to 16 inches. These were the first Navy battleships de-signed from the outset to accommodate floatplanes. After 1936,Navy shipbuilding programs relative to battleships, cruisers,and carriers were timed to place new vessels in service beyondthe expiration of all treaty restrictions in 1942; however, thestart of war in Europe in September 1939 effectively ended thetreaty system altogether. Nonetheless, the treaties had irrevo-cably moved the U.S. and Japan onto a path in which major seaengagements fought a few years hence would be decided, notby converging lines of battleships, but by aircraft launched fromfleets out of sight of one another.

Fleet Tactics

Naval Aviation, while not displacing the primacy of thebattle line, still evolved into a key component of fleet battletactics during the period between the wars. Fleet tactics as awhole, including the specific role to be played by aircraft withinthe Battle and Scouting Fleets, were largely formulated andpracticed over a period of 17 years (1923–1940) through a seriesof 21 different Fleet Problems. Even from the very start, aircraftwere seen as a means of extending the fleet’s striking power,adding over-the-horizon reconnaissance and attack capabilitiesthat had not previously existed. During Fleet Problem I in 1923,before Langley possessed an operational air group, battleshipswere used to simulate aircraft carriers, and their floatplanesfunctioned as fictitious air groups.

The potential shown by Langley’s still incomplete airgroup during Fleet Problem V in 1925 helped speed the com-pletion of fleet carriers Lexington and Saratoga. Although“sunk” afterward, Saratoga, in Fleet Problem IX of 1929, con-vincingly demonstrated how a detached carrier could cir -cumvent an enemy fleet to attack shore installations (i.e., thePanama Canal in this case). The next year, in Fleet Problem X,the tactical advantage abruptly shifted between opposing fleetswhen Saratoga and Langley were both “disabled” by a surpriseattack launched from Lexington. In mock air attacks againstthe Battle Fleet at anchorage in Pearl Harbor, carried out inFleet Problem XIII in 1932 and again in Fleet Problem XIX in1938, the Battle Line was “eliminated” as an effective fightingforce on both occasions. Ironically, virtually the same tacticswould be copied by the Imperial Japanese Navy in December1941.

One of the earliest influences on tactics was the advent ofaerial gun spotting for battleships. By using aircraft to pinpointtargets, accuracy beyond 18,000 yards increased by a factor of200 percent. Initially, from 1919 to 1922, surplus World War Ilandplane fighters had been launched from turret platforms on

one-way flights, but catapult developments during 1922 enableda switch to recoverable floatplanes, with 18 battleships havingbeen fitted with one or more catapults by 1925. Battleships like-wise carried the first shipboard aircraft intended primarily forfleet air defense—float-equipped single-seat fighters—from1925 until 1928, when the concept was overtaken by carrier-based wheeled fighters once Lexington and Saratoga joined theBattle Fleet. The ability of cruisers to carry floatplanes, startingin 1924, brought about an equally dramatic change in tactics,in so far as these ships could now use aircraft to scout largeareas of ocean without distancing themselves from the mainbody of the fleet. However, related efforts to incorporate air-craft-carrying, rigid airships (i.e., Akron and Macon) into thefleet as long-range scouts ended in disaster, with the entire pro-gram being abandoned in mid–1935.

By far, however, the biggest change in fleet tactics waswrought by the introduction of aircraft carriers, especially asLexington and Saratoga began participating in 1929. At first,torpedo attack was seen as a carrier’s primary anti-ship tactic,with the objective of hindering the enemy’s battle line until ourown battleships could maneuver into optimal position (i.e.,crossing the “T” in line astern formation) to administer thecoup de grâce. But starting in 1930, this tactic began givingway to an anti-carrier doctrine: simply stated, before the op-posing battle lines were in a position to maneuver, the carrierforce would use its aircraft to seize control of the air first bysinking or disabling the enemy’s carrier force. Lacking aircover, the enemy fleet would be at a serious disadvantage asour battleships moved into position—crossed the T—to inflicta killing blow from maximum range. Moreover, if carriers werethe primary targets, a low and slow-moving torpedo attackwould be unnecessary; instead, the thin carrier decks could eas-ily be taken out of action by dive-bombing attacks. Equally im-portant, carriers gave the fleet the ability to launch surprise at-tacks on shore installations or to provide air cover and closeair support during amphibious assaults, and a fleet equippedwith two or more carriers could perform these missions inde-pendently and simultaneously. Central to the carrier doctrinewas emphasis on “aggressive offensive action,” which meantfinding the enemy force first and launching an air strike just assoon as it came within range.

An essential building block in the implementation of theNavy’s carrier doctrine was coordination of flight deck opera-tions. As early as 1925 deck crews aboard Langley departedfrom a “clear-deck” landing procedure, which allowed no morethan six aircraft in the air at any time, in favor of a “deck park,”where recovered aircraft were immediately moved up to thebow so incoming aircraft could land right behind them. Otherinnovations included erecting a traverse crash barrier betweenthe deck park and planes landing-on, plus specialized teams offlight deck personnel identified by variously colored jerseys.By 1927, despite limited deck space, Langley was able to keep22 aircraft in the air at any given time, and when Lexington andSaratoga began operating, this number increased to 83. AnotherNavy policy that strengthened anti-carrier tactics (vis-à-vis the

4 Introduction

Japanese) was early emphasis on the scouting function, givingair groups a higher ratio of scouts and bombers versus fightersand torpedo planes, and this policy eventually evolved into de-velopment of one type of aircraft—the scout-bomber—to per-form both roles. Still, from a tactical perspective, the torpedoremained the only aerial weapon capable of inflicting seriousdamage on heavily armored ships, so with the Yorktown classand the planned Essex and Independence classes after it, thisconcern led to a restoration of one torpedo squadron (VT) tofuture air group complements. Henceforth and until the middleof World War II, a U.S. Navy carrier air group typically con-sisted of four squadrons of 22 aircraft each, a VF, a VS, a VB,and a VT, plus a five or six-plane utility unit. Comparatively, aJapanese carrier air group of the same period consisted of foursquadrons of 65 aircraft, one fighter, one dive-bomber, and twotorpedo, with no units dedicated to scouting.

Another decisive advantage of U.S. Navy carrier doctrine(versus the Japanese) lay in the independent authority of carriercaptains and air group commanders (CAGs) to make tacticaldecisions on the spot, as the situation demanded. When thePacific Battle Line ceased to exist as an effective fighting forceon December 7, 1941, the Navy already possessed carrier tacticsof sufficient flexibility that they could be readily adapted to thenaval forces remaining. Following the Pearl Harbor attack, sincethey were no longer tied to support of the battle line, U.S. Navycarriers were given the added capability to maneuver independ-ently and thus respond to rapidly changing tactical conditionsmuch faster than their Japanese counterparts. Though outnum-bered and outgunned by the Japanese fleet, superior tactics em-ployed by U.S. Navy carriers during the early months of thewar made a critical and decisive difference between victory anddefeat.

Introduction 5

Battle formation as seen in 1939. Three battleships in the van with the Enterprise (CV-6) Air Group overhead.

U.S. Government SupportPresidential and congressional support of Naval Aviation

and the Navy in general can be said to have been uniformlyun enthusiastic until 1932, when Franklin Delano Rooseveltbecame president and Democratic majorities swept bothhouses of the U.S. Congress. Roosevelt, a former assistantsecretary of the Navy during World War I, not only champi-oned a strong Navy but also believed Naval Aviation shouldplay a bigger role within it. The Vinson-Trammell ExpansionAct of 1934 authorized (not as yet funded) the Navy to buildup its fleet to levels authorized by the Washington and LondonTreaties and of great importance to Naval Aviation, permittednew operational aircraft to be ordered in proportion to thenumber of aircraft carriers, battleships, and cruisers that wouldbe built. In 1936, Congress funded construction of York town,Enterprise, and Wasp, along with six new cruisers, followedin 1937 by two bat tle ships, and in 1938 by Hornet, Curtiss(AV-4), and Bar negat and Biscayne (AVP-10 and -11), effec-tively tripling the size of Naval Aviation before the end of thedecade.

But the most far-reaching legislation came with passageof the Two-Ocean Naval Expansion Act of 1940. Among otherthings, the act called for construction of 18 new Essex classaircraft carriers, seven battleships, plus the thousands uponthousands of aircraft needed to equip them. Some expertshave char ac terized this act as tantamount to a declaration ofwar against Japan, to-wit: in order to have any practical strate-gic advantage, Japan would be compelled to attack Americanforces and possessions in the Pacific before the ships and air-craft authorized under the Act could begin entering servicein 1942 and 1943.

Naval LeadershipIt goes without saying that none of the foregoing fac-

tors—ships, aircraft, tactics, procedures, or government—would have shifted the advantage in the absence of effectiveleadership. During the period between the wars, as Naval Avi-ation grew in stature, a number of senior Navy officers wereplaced in major leadership positions. Most of these men cameinto their jobs with virtually no practical aviation experience,but together, with great imagination, they forged Naval Avi-ation into a potent fighting force.

Rear Admiral William A. Moffett. Considered bymany to be the “architect of Naval Aviation,” Moffett, at age52, joined the aviation establishment after a brilliant careerserving aboard cruisers and battleships. He had been awardedthe Medal of Honor in 1914 for his actions in the invasion ofVera Cruz, Mexico, while commanding the cruiser Chester.As the first chief of the newly formed U.S. Naval Bureau ofAeronautics (BuAer) in 1921, Mof fett became a leading advo -cate of the belief that aircraft and airships should be integralto the fleet itself, giving strong emphasis to their ability tooperate directly with or from ships in an offensive role. Underhis guidance, BuAer became a nucleus of aviation ideas and

6 Introduction

Battle fleet diagram from the late 1930s.

Figure 1: Typical Cruising Formation

Figure 2: Typical Approach Formation↑

a focal point for development of new aircraft and airships. Inthis role, Moffett also oversaw pilot and aircrew training pro-grams, construction of new air bases, and development of cat-apults and carrier-arresting equipment. He was one of the 60people lost when the airship Akron crashed at sea in 1933.

Vice Admiral Joseph M. Reeves. Regarded at the timeas the Navy’s foremost expert on battleship gunnery, 53-year-old Capt. Reeves assumed the post of Commander, AircraftSquadron, Battle Fleet in 1925, using Langley as his flagship.He is credited with developing the deck park and many of theinnovative deck routines that became standardized in carrieroperations. Reeves also laid the groundwork for the “CarrierWarfare Model,” which determined the tactical role carrierswould play within the Battle Fleet. Later, as a Vice Admiral,Reeves was designated Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Fleet, from1934 to 1936. He died in 1948.

Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King. A submarine officer at thetime, Capt. King transferred to Naval Aviation in 1926 at thebehest of RADM Moffett and became Naval Aviator No. 3368in 1927 at age 49. He commanded the seaplane tender Wrightuntil 1929 and assumed command of Lexington in 1930. Fol-lowing the unexpected death of Moffett, he became the secondchief of BuAer in 1933, being promoted to rear admiral soonafterward. In 1940, as a vice admiral, King was appointed Com-mander-in-Chief, Atlantic Fleet, then in January 1942, becameChief of Naval Operations (CNO). During his wartime tenureas CNO, he was promoted to fleet admiral. He died in 1956.

Fleet Admiral William F. Halsey. Halsey spent most ofhis early naval career in torpedo boats and destroyers. In 1934,at age 52, he reported to NAS Pensacola for pilot training andwas subsequently designated a Naval Aviator. In 1935, afterwin ning his wings, he assumed command of Saratoga.Reaching flag rank in 1938, Halsey took command of CarrierDivision One and Carrier Division Two, and in 1940 becameCommander Aircraft Battle Force with the rank of vice admiral.Perhaps more than any other high-ranking officer, Halsey ex-emplified the concept of “aggressive offensive action.” As afull admiral during World War II, he commanded South PacificForces from late 1942, and in 1944, became Commander-in-Chief, Third Fleet. Halsey was promoted to fleet admiral afterthe war ended and died in 1959.

Admiral John S. McCain, Sr. After serving mainly onbattleships, McCain became a Naval Aviator in 1936 at age 51.From 1937 to 1939, while commanding Ranger, he made majorcontributions to development of aircraft carrier tactics in laterFleet Problems. In early World War II, after being promoted torear admiral, he served as Commander of Air Forces for theWestern Sea Frontier in the South Pacific, then from late 1942to 1944, acted as chief of BuAer. McCain returned to the Pacificin 1944 as a vice admiral in command of the Fast Carrier TaskForce that supported various amphibious operations during1945. He died in September 1945 and received a posthumouspromotion to full admiral. Admiral McCain was the grandfatherof Senator John S. McCain, III.

Admiral Marc A. Mitscher. Naval Aviator No. 33, Mit -

scher served aboard battleships for several years before under-taking flight training in 1916. As pilot of NC-1, he par tic ipatedin the first transatlantic flight attempt in 1919. During the 1920sMitscher was instrumental in developing early flight operationsfrom Langley and Saratoga and in the 1930s, played an activerole in the formulation of tactics and carrier doctrine. He be -came the first captain of Hornet in late 1941 and was in com -mand during the Doolittle raid in April 1942 and the Battle ofMid way in June. As a rear admiral, Mitscher became Com-mander Air, Solomon Islands during 1942 and 1943, then afterpromotion to vice admiral, commanded Task Force 58 in 1944and 1945. After the war, in 1946, he attained full admiral and wasnamed Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Fleet. He died in 1947.

General Roy S. Geiger. Known as the “father of MarineAviation,” Geiger joined the Marines in 1907 and received hiswings as a Naval Aviator in 1917. After serving with the FirstAviation Force in France during World War I and holding var-ious Marine Aviation command positions through the 1920s,he became Officer-in-Charge, Marine Corps Aviation in 1930.After rising to the rank of Colonel in 1935, Geiger was ap -pointed as Commanding Officer, Aircraft One, Fleet MarineForce. In mid–1941, he was promoted to brigadier general whenhis command was reorganized as the 1st Marine Air Wing. Afterthe 1st MAW arrived at Guadalcanal in 1942, Geiger was givencombined command of all Navy, Army Air Force, and Marineair operations in the area and subsequently promoted to majorgeneral. He became director of Marine Aviation in 1943 but re-turned to the Pacific later that year to command the I Amphibi-ous Corps. In mid–1945, as a lieutenant general, he was ap-pointed Commanding General of the Fleet Marine Force,Pa ci fic. He died in 1947 and was posthumously promoted tofour-star general.

Emergence of Marine Corps Aviation

Following World War I, the aviation arm of the MarineCorps almost ended before it got off to a good start. When the2,462-man strong First Aviation Force disbanded in 1919,Marine aviation suddenly found itself with no permanent statuswithin the peace time Naval Aviation establishment. Given thistenuous state of affairs, Marine officials, most notably its Di-rector of Aviation, Major Alfred A. Cunningham, began ac -tively lobbying the U.S. Congress to mandate a permanent post-war Marine aviation branch. In 1920, due in part to these efforts,Congress established a peacetime Marine manpower level at a20 percent ratio (i.e., 26,380 officers and men) of the Navy,which included 1,020 personnel allocated to aviation operationsas well as establishing permanent Marine air stations (MCAS)at Quantico, Parris Island, and San Diego.

From this point forward, Marine Aviation was entirely re-formed in terms of both organization and mission. DuringWorld War I, the First Aviation Force had operated without anyorganic connection to Marine ground forces; however, underthe 1920 plan, it was reorganized into four groups of squadronsor detachments having the prime mission of supporting Marine

Introduction 7

operations on the ground. Marine Aviation did not actually be-come an official part of the Naval Aviation establishment untilearly 1925, from which point procurement of virtually all Ma -rine aircraft, with minor exceptions, was tied to the BuAer sys-tem and likewise, prospective Marine pilots were trained pur-suant to the Student Naval Aviator curriculum at NASPensacola. By the late 1920s, Marine fighter and observationsquad rons had been reequipped with carrier-capable aircraftand routinely underwent carrier qualification as an operationaltraining requirement, and from 1932 to 1934, two Marinesquadrons were detached for permanent duty aboard Lexingtonand Sara toga.

In 1927 Marine Aviation reorganized itself into the EastCoast Expeditionary Force (Quantico) and West Coast Expe-ditionary Force (San Diego), with squadrons detached to sup -port ground operations in China, Haiti, and Nicaragua. Duringthis timeframe Marine Aviation is generally credited withhaving developed the first combat-tested dive-bombing tech-niques while providing close air support to ground forces duringthe Nicaraguan campaign. Commencing with the establishmentof the Fleet Marine Force (FMF) in 1933, Marine Aviation, withan inventory of 92 aircraft at the time, was reclassified betweenFMF Aircraft One on the West Coast (three squadrons) andFMF Aircraft Two on the East Coast (four squadrons), and thisscheme of organization, with its emphasis on support of am-phibious and ground operations, remained in force into theWorld War II–era and afterward. From 1930, in addition to reg-ular frontline squadrons, Marine Aviation’s pool of pilots andtrained personnel was augmented by establishment of reserveunits, having grown to 10 squadrons by 1940, and the reservepilot training system (Navy and Marine both) received anotherboost in 1935 with the passage of the Naval Aviation Cadet Pro-gram. During 1941, Marine Aviation grew to a strength of 6,467officers and men with 659 rated pilots, but the process of bring-ing new units to operational readiness went much slower, sothat as of December 6, 1941, frontline operational strength con-sisted of just 227 combat aircraft in two air wings with fivefrontline squadrons each. In the four years that followed (1942–1945), these numbers increased to an incredible 116,648 officersand men with 10,049 pilots, organized into five air wings, 31air groups, and 103 squadrons.

Emergence of Coast Guard Aviation

The U.S. Coast Guard came into being in 1915 as a resultof a merger of the Revenue Cutter Service (armed maritime

law enforcement) and Life-Saving Service (assistance to shipsin distress). From its initial organization, the Coast Guard func-tioned an agency of the U.S. Treasury Department until No-vember 1941, from which point operational control was vestedin the Navy Department. In 1916 and 1917, with the objectiveof establishing an aviation group within the Coast Guard, anumber of its officers underwent pilot training at NAS Pen-sacola, but as events tran spired, they were subsequently as -signed to serve in various Navy aviation units for the durationof World War I. The first actual Coast Guard Aviation oper -ations commenced in 1920 when six Curtiss flying boats onloan from the Navy were used to evaluate the practicality ofaerial search and rescue missions from a base established atMorehead City, North Carolina; however, operations ceased in1921 due to lack of funding. In 1926, after five years of inactivity,Coast Guard Aviation finally received funding to acquire fivesingle-engine seaplanes to be operated from new bases estab-lished at Gloucester, Massachusetts, and Cape May, New Jersey,for the purpose of assisting Coast Guard vessels in the detectionand apprehension of Prohibition Act violators (i.e., liquorsmugglers).

But the most significant expansion of Coast Guard Avi -ation came in the early and mid–1930s as search and rescue ca-pabilities were added to augment its law enforcement duties.Between 1931 and 1935, over 40 aircraft were added to the CoastGuard air fleet, including 19 twin-engine seaplanes (i.e.,Douglas RDs and General Aviation PJs) billed as “flying lifeboats” and 15 single-engine amphibians (i.e., Grumman JFs)that could be used for either law enforcement or rescues mis-sions. Coast Guard Aviation continued to grow through the late1930s, establishing new operating bases on both coasts, and bylate 1941, when it officially came under the Navy Department,numbered 90 pilots and 56 aircraft divided between 10 bases.Although the Coast Guard adopted the naval designation systemfor its aircraft, it appears that procurement was made throughthe Treasury Department rather than BuAer until 1941. Theexact numbers of aircraft serving with the Coast Guard duringWorld War II is not reported anywhere, but some referencessuggest that up to 300 aircraft, most under Navy bureaunumbers but some under AAF serials, were allocated to CoastGuard units between 1942 and 1945. Coast Guard aircraft flewarmed antisubmarine patrols off both coasts and the Gulf ofMexico during the wartime period, but search and rescue op-erations, including ships sunk or in distress and downed aircraft,remained their prime mission. Control of the Coast Guard re-verted back to the Treasury Department in 1946.

8 Introduction

PART I

Heavier-Than-Air Development

9

ATTACK AIRCRAFT

Synopsis of Attack Aircraft Procurement

The first decade following World War I marked a dramaticshift in emphasis by Naval Aviation from shore-based aerialattack toward aircraft launched from carriers operating withinthe Battle Fleet. As the United States’ first carrier, USS Langley(CV-1), joined the fleet in 1922, the Navy possessed no made-for-purpose carrier aircraft and had yet to develop any practicalcriteria upon which new aircraft requirements could be issued,and even after the first true fleet carriers, Lexington andSaratoga (CV-2 and -3), entered service in late 1927, budgetaryconstraints obliged the newly established carrier air groups tomake due with a variegated mix of aircraft, many of which hadbeen adapted from obsolescent floatplane and landplanedesigns. Thus, from its inception in 1921, one of the U.S. NavalBureau of Aeronautics’ (BuAer) principal aims in procuringnew aircraft—for obvious logistical and financial reasons—was to combine as many functions as practical into one air-frame-engine combination. What the new carrier air groupsneeded were more fighters to improve air superiority aroundthe Battle Fleet and more dedicated attack aircraft to extendthe reach of the fleet’s offensive striking power.

During the mid and late 1920s, the aerial torpedo wasviewed as Naval Aviation’s principal anti-ship weapon, so thatearly procurement efforts were focused mainly on carrier-basedtorpedo planes like the Martin T3M and T4M. At the sametime, to pre serve some shore-based torpedo and bombing ca-pability, BuAer commenced development of the twin-engineNaval Aircraft Fac tory TN/Douglas T2D; however, after AirCorps criticism, the Navy was officially restricted from main-taining land-based bombardment operations, and these air craftwere subsequently reconfigured as floatplanes for patrol duties.As Naval Aviation moved into the decade of 1930s, rapidprogress made in dive-bombing tactics influenced a shift towardprocurement of purpose-built bomber and bomber-fighter typeslike the Martin BM, Great Lakes BG, and Curtiss BFC/BF2Cto such extent that the Navy’s fourth carrier, USS Ranger (CV-

4), was launched in 1933 with no provision for torpedo stow -age.

By 1935, however, further refinements of tactics led BuAerto narrow the field to two basic attack classifications: two-seatscout-bombers (SB) combining the functions of scouting anddive-bombing into one airplane and three-seat torpedo bombers(TB) capable of either launching torpedoes or making levelbombing runs. Renewed interest in torpedo-carrying aircrafthad been spurred by the prospect of developing new aircrafttypes for the larger Yorktown class carriers planned. Carrier airgroups, from this point, typically comprised four squadrons of15 to 22 aircraft, consisting of one fighter unit (VF), two scout-bomber units (normally one VS and one VB), and one torpedo-bomber unit (VT), and this would form the basic air group pat-tern for fleet carriers until the middle of World War II. Thisrule-of-thumb did not apply, at least initially, to the two fleetcarriers built without provision for torpedo stowage, Ranger(CV-4) and Wasp (CV-7), which both carried an extra VS unitinstead of a VT.

While BuAer made considerable progress in establishingthe functional criteria for carrier-based attack aircraft, it wasdecidedly slow in taking advantage of certain advances seen inthe aeronautical state-of-the-art during the 1930s. Chief amongits concerns was the higher operating speeds and unforgivingstall char ac teristics exhibited by newer all-metal monoplanedesigns, with the result that all of the fleet’s operational attackaircraft were biplanes until the first monoplane types began en-tering service in late 1937. This conservative approach to inno -vation was nowhere more apparent than in 1934 and 1935 whensimultaneous requirements were issued for new monoplane andbiplane torpedo and scout-bombers as a hedge against the pos-sibility that the monoplane types might fail to work out. How-ever, as events transpired, new monoplanes like the DouglasTBD and Vought SB2U measurably out-per formed the biplaneswhile still demonstrating acceptable approach speeds and wave-off characteristics. Although the first monoplane scout and tor-pedo-bombers began reaching fleet squadrons in late 1937, there-equipping process was lethargic and did not keep pace withthe formation of new air groups necessitated by new carriers

coming into commission (i.e., Yorktown in 1937, Enterprise in1938, Wasp in 1940, and Hornet in 1941).

The outbreak of war in Europe in 1939, coupled with se-rious concerns over Japan’s intentions in the Pacific, inducedU.S. policy-makers to lay plans for an unprecedented expansionof Naval Aviation. In 1940 the U.S. Congress authorized a mas-sive carrier construction program, encompassing not only anew class of fleet carriers but providing for light carriers(CVLs) and escort carriers (CVEs) as well. To equip the emer-gent carrier force, BuAer pressed aircraft companies hard todevelop new types of attack aircraft (i.e., Brewster SB2A, Cur-tiss SB2C, Grumman TBF, and Vought TBU) and simultane-

ously announced plans to order them in unheard of quantities.But the effect was far from instantaneous, so that by December1941 the Navy’s inventory of dedicated attack aircraft stood atonly 809 torpedo and scout-bombers. During the course ofWorld War II this figure grew exponentially, rising to 10,038attack aircraft on hand by the middle of 1945.

Airco DH-4B/4M (O2B)—1918TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (DH-4B)

Type: Two-place observation, bomber, and general purpose.Manufacturer: Dayton-Wright Co., Dayton, Ohio; Standard Aircraft

10 United States Naval Aviation, 1919–1941

Boeing O2B

Corp., Patterson, New Jersey; Fisher BodyDiv. of General Motors, Cleveland, Ohio;Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington;and Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania.

Total produced: 222 (USN/USMC)Powerplant: One 400-hp (various auto mfrs.)

Liberty 12-cylinder water-cooled inline en-gine driving a two-bladed fixed-pitchwooden propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward-firing .30-cal.machine guns, two flexible .30-cal. ma -chine guns in rear cockpit, and up 322 lbs.of bombs carried on wing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 123 mph at s.l.;ceiling 14,000 ft.; combat range 550 mi.

Weights: 2,939 lbs. empty, 4,595 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 42 ft. 51⁄2 in., length 29 ft. 11

in., wing area 440 sq. ft.

Based on Geoffrey de Havilland’sBrit ish design for Airco, a total of 4,846DH-4s powered by American-designed andmade Liberty engines were license-built in the U.S. during 1918and 1919. From 1919 to 1923, to improve crash protection andcrew communication, 1,538 DH-4s were completed or con -verted to DH-4B standard, which entailed moving the mainfuel tank forward and the cockpit aft, repositioning the landinggear, and skinning the entire fuselage with plywood. In the in-terval, the Navy received 92 DH-4Bs from the War Department,including 50 DH-4B-1s with increased fuel capacity, plus an-other 80 rebuilt by the Naval Aircraft Factory. Starting in 1923as an Army program, 147 DH-4s were remanufactured by Boe-ing as the DH-4M with new welded, steel tube fuselages, and

30 were delivered to the Marine Corps in 1925 under the newdesignation O2B-1. DH-4Bs and O2Bs serving with MarineExpeditionary Forces in Nicaragua during 1927 were creditedwith developing the first combat-tested dive-bombing tech-niques. The Navy operated DH-4Bs until 1927, while the lastO2Bs remained in Marine service until 1929.

Curtiss R-6L—1919TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R-6L)

Type: Two-place observation and torpedo floatplane.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane Co., Buffalo, New York.

Part I: Heavier-Than-Air Development 11

This Marine DH-4B-1 was attached to VO-8M out of San Diego in 1927, one of 80 DH-4Bs rebuilt from War Department stocks by the Naval Aircraft Factory during theearly 1920s. Replaced by OC-1s in 1928.

An R-6L seen on beaching dolly about 1920. Retrofitting of a 400-hp Liberty engine gave it the ability to take off with a 1,063-poundaerial torpedo. Two squadrons were maintained until 1922.

Total produced: 40 (USN)Powerplant: One 400-hp (various auto mfrs.) Liberty 12-cylinder water-

cooled inline engine driving a two-bladed fixed-pitch woodenpropeller.

Armament: One 1,036-lb. torpedo carried between the floats.Performance: Max. speed 104 mph at s.l.; ceiling 9,900 ft.; combat

range 368 mi.Weights: 3,513 lbs. empty, 5,662 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 57 ft. 1 in., length 33 ft. 5 in., wing area 613 sq.

ft.

Introduced in 1915 with a 150-hp Curtiss V-X engine, theCurtiss R Series was subsequently produced as an observation

aircraft in both landplane and float-equipped versions for theArmy, Navy, and Britain’s Royal Naval Air Service. The last40 of 76 Navy R-6s built in 1918 became R-6Ls when they weremodified to accept installation of 400-hp Liberty 12 engines.With the added power, the R-6L was the first Navy aircraft ca-pable of lifting a torpedo. After carrying out successful testsin the spring of 1919, the Navy established two R-6L torpedosquadrons, one in San Diego, California, and another in Hamp-ton Roads, Virginia. Not very well suited to the stresses of tor-pedo-carrying operations, all R-6Ls were replaced by neweraircraft types in 1921 and 1922.


Curtiss R-6L

Martin MBT/MT-1 (TM)—1920TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (MT-1)

Type: Three or four-place torpedo bomber.Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 10 (USN/USMC)Powerplant: Two 400-hp (various auto mfrs.) Liberty 12-cylinder water-

cooled inline engine driving two-bladed fixed-pitch wooden pro-pellers.

Armament: Two flexible .30-cal. machine guns in the nose, two flexible.30-cal. machine guns in the rear cockpit, and one 1,618-lb.torpedo carried under the fuselage.

Performance: Max. speed 105 mph at s.l.; ceiling 9,900 ft.; combatrange 400 mi.

Weights: 7,150 lbs. empty, 12, 076 lbs. loaded.

Dimensions: Span 74 ft. 2 in., length 42 ft. 8 in., wing area 1,121 sq.ft.

Intended as a land-based bomber and torpedo plane, thetwin-engine MBT was a three-bay biplane of wood and fabricconstruction, essentially identical to Martin’s Army MB-1 of1918. Martin delivered a total of ten of these big aircraft to theNavy during 1920, two MBTs followed by eight MT-1s built tothe same specification as the longer wing Army MB-2. TheNavy retained four of these aircraft at its San Diego, Californiabase and the remaining six were transferred to the MarineCorps. When the Navy adopted a standardized system for iden-tifying its aircraft in 1922, MBTs and MT-1s were re-designated


Martin MT-1

TM-1. The last Marine example was withdrawn from servicesometime in 1928.

Naval Aircraft Factory PT—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PT-2)Type: Two-place patrol and torpedo floatplane.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Total produced: 33 (USN)Powerplant: One 330-hp (various auto mfrs.) Liberty 12-cylinder water-

cooled inline engine driving a two-bladed fixed-pitch woodenpropeller.

Armament: One 1,446-lb. torpedo carried between the floats.Performance: Max. speed 100 mph at s.l.; ceiling 6,100 ft.; combat

range 334 mi.Weights: 4,231 lbs. empty, 7, 075 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 74 ft. 0 in., length 34 ft. 5 in., wing area 808.5 sq.

ft.

To overcome theshort comings of the R-6Land make use of surplusparts on hand, NAF cre -ated the PT-1 by combiningthe fuselage of the R-6with the wings of a CurtissHS-1L flying boat (see,below) and enlarging thevertical tail surfaces to off-set increased wing area.After delivering 15 PT-1s in1921, NAF produced a fur-ther 18 in 1922 as the PT-2,which differed in havingthe larger wing of the HS-2L. PTs were used by theNavy primarily to evaluatetactics for torpedo attack,and in 1922, conducted thefirst mass attack on a realtarget when they launched


One of four Navy MT-1s based at NAS San Diego in 1922 or 1923. Used for land-based bombing or torpedo attack. Note aerial torpedomounted between the landing gear.

A PT-2 with torpedo loaded between floats is seen in 1922 on beaching dolly. This type combined aCurtiss R-6 fuselage with HS-2L wings and was used primarily to evaluate torpedo attack tactics inearly 1920s.

live torpedoes against an old, mothballed battleship. PTs wereonly in service briefly, being replaced within a couple of yearsby newer types such as the Douglas DT.

Curtiss CT—1921

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (CT-1)

Type: Three-place torpedo floatplane.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 350-hp Curtiss D-12 (V-1145) 12-cylinder water-

cooled inline engine driving two-bladed fixed-pitch wooden pro-pellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. machine gun in the rear cock pit andone 1,835-lb. torpedo carried between the floats or wheels.


Weights: 7,684 lbs. empty, 11,208 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 65 ft., length 52 ft., wing area 830 sq. ft.

In an effort to find a better torpedo plane, the CT-1 wasone of two twin-engine monoplanes considered by the Navy in1921 and 1922. Constructed entirely of wood, the CT-1 emergedwith a very thick, fully cantilevered wing and a tailplane sup-ported by booms running from the rear of the engine nacellesand the afterbodies of the floats. The prototype was initiallyflown in March 1921 with two 300-hp Wright Hispano V-8 en-


Naval Aircraft Factory PT-1

A CT-1 is shown during tests in 1921 with original Wright Hispano engines. The serial number appears on the side of floats. TheNavy ultimately abandoned the idea in favor of single-engine designs.

Curtiss CT-1

gines, but was found to be underpowered for its weight. Aftersubstituting 350-hp Curtiss D-12 engines, the CT-1 was re-de-livered to the Navy for testing in 1922. Once testing was com-pleted, the Navy placed an order for eight production CT-1s,however, after a decision was made to procure single-enginetypes in quantity, the contract was cancelled before any furtherexamples had been built.

Douglas DT—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (DT-2 SEAPLANE)

Type: Two-place torpedo landplaneand floatplane.

Manufacturer: Douglas AircraftCo., Santa Monica, Cali -fornia; L.W.F. EngineeringCo., Long Island, New York;and Naval Aircraft Factory,Phil adelphia, Pennsylvania.

Total produced: 67 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 420-hp Liberty

12A 12-cylinder water-cooledinline engine driving a two-bladed fixed-pitch woodenpropeller.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal.machine gun in the rear cock-pit and one 1,835-lb. torpedocarried between the floats orwheels.

Performance: Max. speed 99 mphat s.l.; ceiling 7,400 ft.; com-bat range 275 mi.

Weights: 4,528 lbs. empty, 7,293lbs. loaded.

Dimensions: Span 50 ft. 0 in.,length 37 ft. 8 in., wing area707 sq. ft.

The DT was the first aircraft to beproduced in quantity by Douglas Aircraftand one of the most important Navy com -bat types of the early and mid–1920s.Based largely on the design of Douglas’sfirst plane, the Cloudster, the DT was atwo-bay biplane featuring a welded, steeltube fuselage, with wings and tail surfacesof built-up wooden construction. Likemost naval aircraft of the period, it couldbe rigged as either a landplane or seaplane,and the wings could be folded rearward forstowage. In November 1921, the Navy tookdelivery of the first of three single-seat DT-1s ordered, then after trials concluded inearly 1922, directed that the remaining twobe completed as two-seaters. Soon after-ward, the Navy gave Douglas an order toproduce 38 two-seat types as the DT-2 andalso contracted with L.W.F. to build 20 andwith NAF to build another six.

As deliveries proceeded, DT-2s began entering operationalservice in late 1922 with VT-2 in San Diego, California, andduring 1923 and 1924, at least six were transferred to the MarineCorps. Two NAF DT-2s became DT-4s when they were fittedwith 525-hp Wright TA-2 engines, and another modified as atestbed with the installation of a 400-hp Wright P-1 air-cooledradial engine was re-designated DT-6. Three L.W.F. DT-2s re-built by Dayton-Wright with deeper fuselages to carry morefuel returned to service as SDW long-range scouts. All DTshad been withdrawn from Navy and Marine service by the endof 1927.


Top: DT, based on the Douglas Cloudster, was the first Navy aircraft built from theground up as a torpedo plane. This example, an early production DT-2, is seen servingwith VT-2 in the early 1920s. Bottom: Same aircraft as previous photograph, seen in1923 while rigged with floats. Last examples withdrawn in 1927.

Stout ST—1922TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (ST-1)

Type: Two-place torpedo landplane and floatplane.Manufacturer: Stout Metal Airplane Co., Dearborn, Michigan.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: Two 330-hp Packard V-1237 12-cylinder water-cooled

inline engines driving two-bladed fixed-pitch wooden propel -lers.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. machine gun in the rear cockpit andone 1,835-lb. torpedo carried between the floats or wheels.



Another torpedo-carrying twin-engine monoplane typeevaluated by the Navy, the Stout ST-1 presented an early Amer-ican example of the all-metal construction methods previouslydeveloped in Germany by Junkers. The use of fully cantileveredstructures skinned in corrugated duraluminum produced an ex-ceptionally clean design for its day. In 1921, the Navy madeplans to acquire at least five of these aircraft, but soon after itsfirst flight on April 25, 1922, the ST-1 prototype inexplicablycrashed and the order was cancelled. Stout went on to become


Douglas DT-4


The sole example of ST-1 before delivery in 1922. The Navy ordered five aircraft, but cancelled the contract after the prototypecrashed. It was intended as a shore-based torpedo plane.

Stout ST-1

a division of Ford Motor Co. and produce the well-known lineof Tri-Motor transports.

Curtiss CS and Martin SC (T2M)—1924

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SC-2 SEAPLANE)

Type: Three-place scout and torpedo landplane or floatplane.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York;

and Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.

Total produced: 78 (USN)Powerplant: One 540-hp Wright T-3 12-cylinder water-cooled inline

engine driving a two-bladed fixed-pitch wooden propeller.Armament: One flexible .30-cal. machine gun in the middle cock pit

and one 1,618-lb. torpedo carried between the floats or wheels.Performance: Max. speed 101 mph at s.l.; ceiling 5,430 ft.; combat

range 335 mi.Weights: 5,908 lbs. empty, 9,323 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 56 ft. 6 in., length 41 ft. 9 in., wing area 856 sq. ft.

Intended as a replacement for the DT, the Curtiss CS arosefrom a standard Naval Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) design


Curtiss CS-1

that would be contracted out to var -ious manufacturers on a bid basis ifplaced in production. It appeared as asingle-bay biplane of fabric-covered,wooden construction, characterizedby an upper wing having about sixfeet less span than the lower, and astypical with naval types of the era,could be operated on either wheels orfloats and had foldable wings. Curtissreceived the initial construction con-tract, delivering the first CS-1 in No-vember 1923, followed in January1924 by two CS-2s powered with 585-hp geared Wright T-3 engines. In June1924, however, after coming in as thelow bidder at $20,000 per aircraft,Martin obtained the production orderunder two separate contracts: 35 ex-amples powered by T-2 engines deliv-ered as the SC-1 between Februaryand August 1925, and 40 powered byT-3s delivered as the SC-2 by the endof the year.

As they arrived to equip frontline units, SC-1s and 2sserved with two scout and two torpedo squadrons, and underthe new designation scheme, they became the T2M-1 and -2.Like many military aircraft developed during the 1920s, theservice life of the SC/T2M was relatively brief, and all hadbeen replaced by newer aircraft by the end of 1928.

Martin T3M—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (T3M-2)

Type: Three-place scout and torpedolandplane or floatplane.

Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co.,Cleveland, Ohio.

Total produced: 126 (USN)Powerplant: One 710-hp Packard 3A-

2500 12-cylinder inline driving athree-bladed

Hamilton Standard fixed-pitch pro-peller.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. rearmachine gun in rear cock pit andone torpedo or up to 1,500 lbs. ofbombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 109 mph ats.l.; ceiling 7,900 ft.; combatrange 634 mi.

Weights: 5,814 lbs. empty, 9503 lbs.loaded.

Dimensions: Span 56 ft. 7 in., length41 ft. 4 in., wing area 883 sq. ft.

The T3M originated in late1925 as a development of the SC/T2M with a welded, steel tube

fuselage structure and a 575-hp Wright T-3B engine. After Mar-tin had delivered 26 examples in 1926 as the T3M-1, BuAerasked for a more powerful derivative having greater wing area,redesigned crew locations, and arresting gear, giving it the dis-tinction of becoming the first type of attack aircraft intendedspecifically for carrier operations. The resulting T3M-2, flownin early 1927, had equal span wings (unlike the short upperwing of the T3M-1), a 135-hp increase in power, three individualcockpits in tandem for the pilot, bombardier, and gunner/ob-server, plus a tailhook to engage arresting wires. After accept-ance, Martin was given a contract to built 100 of the type.


A float-equipped CS-1 as seen in 1924. It was designed to a multi-role function as a scout,bombing, or torpedo plane, either on wheels or floats. All but three were ultimately producedby Martin as the SC-1 and -2.

A float-equipped T3M-2 of VT-9S attached to the seaplane tender Wright. Note small “s” onfuselage side marking, indicating that the aircraft was serving with the Scouting Fleet.

Deliveries of T3M-2s to active service units began in mid–1927, and by the end of the year they were equipping VT-1Saboard the newly commissioned Lexington and VT-2B of Lan-gley, the Navy’s first carrier. T3M-2s also were assigned toshore-based squadrons, where they served as the Navy’s stan-

dard single-engine torpedo plane. As typical of naval aircraftdeveloped in the mid–1920s, the T3M-2 was rapidly overtakenby newer types and began to be replaced in frontline service asearly as mid–1928 and had been relegated to utility status by1930.

Martin T3M-2


Boeing TB—1927TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TB-1)

Type: Three- place scout and torpedo landplane orfloatplane.

Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Wash-ington.

Total produced: 3 (USN)Powerplant: One 730-hp Packard 1A-2500 12-

cylinder inline driving a three- bladed HamiltonStandard fixed- pitch propeller.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. rear machine gunin rear cockpit and one torpedo or up to 1,500lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 106 mph at sea level.; ceil-ing 11,750 ft.; combat range 850 mi.

Weights: 6,298 lbs. empty, 10,537 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 55 ft., length 42 ft. 7 in., wing

area 868 sq. ft.

Another BuAer- inspired design, the TB-1was ordered from Boeing in May 1925 to beconsidered alongside the Martin T3M-1, how-ever, the first of three aircraft ordered did notreach the Navy until May 1927, by which timethe T3M-2 had already been placed in produc-tion. The landplane version featured an unusual four- wheeled landing gear arrangement, but ap-parently was never equipped with arresting gearfor carrier operations. The TBs were the last non- indigenous aircraft designs to be built byBoeing until the advent of World War II.


The first carrier-based attack aircraft: This T3M-2 is seen dropping parachutists while serving with VT-2B aboard Langley in 1927.The squadron moved to the Saratoga Air Group during 1928.

Boeing TB-1

Naval Aircraft Factory TN and Douglas T2D/P2D—1927

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (T2D-1 [P2D-1])

Type: Four- place torpedo landplane or floatplane; three- place patrol bomber.

Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania; and Douglas Aircraft Co., SantaMonica, California.

Total produced: 31Powerplant: Two 525-hp Wright R-1750 [575-hp Wright

R-1820] Cyclone 9-cylinder air- cooled radial en-gines driving two- bladed [three- bladed] HamiltonStandard fixed- pitch propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun infront cockpit, one flexible .30-cal. rear machine gunin rear cockpit, and one torpedo or up to 1,835 lbs.of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph [135 mph] at s.1.; ceil-ing 14,400 ft. [12,100 ft.]; combat range 454 mi.[1,010 mi.].

Weights: 6,298 lbs. empty, 10,537 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 55 ft., length 42 ft. 7 in., wing area

868 sq. ft.

The TN and T2D offer an interesting exampleof naval aircraft procurement practices prior to theGreat Depression. In this case, after creating thebasic design concept in early 1925, BuAer assignedNAF the task of initial development. While con-struction of NAF’s XTN-1 prototype was still inprogress, BuAer contracted with Douglas to pro-duce three essentially identical aircraft as the T2D-1. Whether by accident or design, BuAer’s conceptfor a twin- engine torpedo plane bore a close re-semblance to the land- based biplane bombersbeing developed around the same time for theArmy Air Corps (e.g., Curtiss B-2 and KeystoneB-3). Despite getting a later start, Douglas flew itsfirst T2D-1 in a landplane configuration on Janu-

ary 27, 1927, several months ahead of NAF’s XTN-1. Afterofficial acceptance, all three T2D-1s were assigned to VT-2out of San Diego, and after embarking aboard the Langleyin mid–1927, earned the distinction of being first type of twin- engine aircraft to be operated from an aircraft carrier.

Later the same year, BuAer officials were sufficientlyencouraged to order nine more T2D-1s, but by the time de-liveries commenced, official Army criticism of the Navy’s land- based bomber operations caused them to be configuredas floatplanes and shifted to patrol duties with VP-1 out ofPearl Harbor. In 1930, Douglas received a follow- up orderfor an improved patrol variant, which differed in havingtwin rudders, ring cowls, and upgraded engines. After thelast of 18 examples had been delivered in 1932, P2D-1sserved with VP-3 in the Panama Canal Zone until replacedby PBY-1s in 1937.


Based on an internal BuAer design, the TB-1 was originally intendedto be considered with the Martin T3M-1, but by the time it arrivedfor evaluations in mid–1927, the T3M-2 had already been ordered.

Douglas T2D-1(Production)

Martin T4M and Great Lakes TG—1927

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (T4M-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo planeManufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio; Great Lakes

Aircraft Corp., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 153 (USM, USMC)Powerplant: One 525-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690-24 9-cylinder radial

driving a three- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitch propeller.Armament: One flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun in rear cockpit and

one torpedo or up to 1,500 lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 114 mph at s.1.; cruise 98 mph; ceiling 10,150ft.; combat range 363 mi.

Weights: 3,931 lbs. empty, 8,071 lbs. max. loaded.Dimensions: Span 53 ft., length 35 ft. 7 in., wing area 656 sq. ft.

The T4M/TG biplane was the Navy’s principal carrier- based torpedo aircraft from 1928 until it was replaced during1937 by Douglas TBD monoplanes. When BuAer began ex-pressing a preference for aircraft equipped with air- cooled en-gines, Martin, in early 1927, modified the first T3M-2 prototypeto accept installation of an R-1690 Hornet radial and delivered


Top: The second T2D-1 was delivered in early 1927. This T2D-1 with two others embarked aboard Langley in mid–1927 where theyearned the distinction of being the first twin-engine aircraft to operate from a carrier. Bottom: This P2D-1 served with VP-3 in thePanama Canal Zone from 1932 until 1937, when the unit started receiving PBY-1s. All had been withdrawn from service by the endof that year.

it for tests as the XT3M-3. Experimental trials were sufficientlyencouraging that BuAer ordered an improved Hornet- poweredprototype from Martin under the designation XT4M-1. Whenthe XT4M-1 arrived for testing in April 1927, it had smaller, narrow- chord wings, a balanced rudder, and many other refine-ments to the overall fuselage design. Like the T3M-2, it wasconvertible to floatplane operations. Martin was awarded a pro-

duction contract for 102 T4M-1s in June 1927 and deliveries tofleet units began in mid–1928. Great Lakes acquired Martin’sCleveland plant and production rights to the T4M in late 1928,and it produced a further 18 aircraft delivered in early 1930 asthe TG-1. In July 1930 Great Lakes received an order for 32 ad-ditional aircraft to be equipped with Wright R-1820-86 Cycloneengines under the designation TG-2. Delivered from mid–1931,


Martin T4M-1

the TG-2 offered a 10 mph increase in top speed and improved rate- of- climb.

VT-2B of Saratoga’s air group received its first T4M-1s inAugust 1928, followed by VT-1B aboard Lexington later in theyear, and both units were augmented with deliveries of TG-1sin 1930. When TG-2s began arriving in June 1931, the T4M-1s/TG-1s of VT-2B were transferred to shore- based utility orreserve units; those with VT-1B experienced a similar fate when

the unit converted to Martin BM-1 dive- bombers in 1932.BuAer’s efforts to find a T4M/TG replacement in the early1930s were not successful, with the result that TG-2s remainedactive with VT-2B until the first TBD-1s began arriving in Oc-tober 1937. Many T4Ms/TGs saw service in Navy and Marinereserve units up through the late 1930s, and six remained onthe naval inventory as of December 1941.


Top: Identical to the T4M-1, this TG-1 of VT-2B was one of 18 produced by Great Lakes in 1930. After being replaced by TG-2s in1931 and 1932, all T4M-1s and TG-1s were assigned to shore stations or reserve units. Bottom: This reserve T4M-1 is shown servingwith VN-12RD2 at NRAB Robertson in St. Louis, Missouri, during the late 1930s. Seven T4Ms and TGs remained on the naval inven-tory at the end of 1941.

Naval Aircraft Factory T2N and Martin BM (T5M)—1930

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (BM-2)

Type: Two- place dive- bomber.Manufacturer: Naval aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-

vania; and Glenn L. Martin Co., Baltimore, Maryland.Total produced: 34 (USN)Powerplant: One 625-hp. Pratt & Whitney R-1690-44 9-cylinder

radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitchpropeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun andone flexible .30-cal. machine gun in rear cockpit, and upto 1,000 lbs. of bombs (or one torpedo) carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 146 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling 16,800ft.; combat range 413 mi.

Weights: 3,662 lbs. empty, 6,219 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 41 ft., length 28 ft. 9 in., wing area 436 sq.

ft.


Martin BM-1

The first Navy aircraft designed to a dive-bomber specification, the T2Nand BM were virtually identical except for powerplants. The BM-1 pic-tured served with VB-3B aboard Langley in 1934.

The NAF T2N and Martin T5M/BM occupy the dis-tinction of being the first made- for- purpose dive- bomberaircraft ordered by the Navy. Successful naval experimentswith dive- bombing and recent Marine combat experienceusing the tactic in Nicaragua inspired BuAer in 1928 toissue a requirement for a new biplane dive- bomber typecapable of lifting a bomb heavy enough (i.e., 500 lbs.+) todamage or sink an armored warship. The general aerody-namic and structural design for the new type was laid downby BuAer itself and contracts for single prototypes wereissued in June 1928 to Naval Aircraft Factory for an R-1750-powered version, designated XT2N-1, and to Martinfor an R-1690-powered version, designated XT5M-1. Bothaircraft featured the newly invented bomb crutch, a tubularmetal device that swung the bomb past the propeller arcduring steep (i.e., 70 to 80 deg.) dives. The XT2N-1 andXT5M-1 prototypes made their first flights close togetherin March 1930 and were thereafter delivered to NAS Ana-costia for testing and evaluations.

In April 1931 Martin received a contract to manu -facture 12 aircraft, re-designated BM-1 under the newbomber (B) category. Later, in October 1931, the Navy or-dered 16 additional examples as BM-2s, which differedonly in small details, then in 1932 Martin was directed toproduce five more examples to be completed as BM-1s.The active service of BM-1s and -2s was primarily withtwo carrier units: VT-1S (later VB-1S) aboard Lexingtonbeginning in 1932 and VB-3B aboard Langley in 1934. AllBMs were withdrawn from fleet service during 1937 butcontinued to be used at shore stations for miscellaneoustest and utility duties until the last example was scrappedin 1940.

Martin T6M—1930TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XT6M-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo planeManufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Baltimore, Maryland.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 575-hp Wright R-1820-58 9-

cylinder radial driving a two- bladed HamiltonStandard fixed- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two flexible .30-cal. rear machine gunsin rear cockpit and one torpedo or up to 1,500lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph at s.1.; ceiling11,600 ft.; combat range 323 mi.

Weights: 3,500 lbs. empty, 6,841 lbs. max. loaded.Dimensions: Span 42 ft. 3 in., length 33 ft. 8 in., wing

area 502 sq. ft.

Ordered by BuAer in mid–1929, the T6Mrepresented one of several unsuccessful


The single XT6M-1 as it appeared for trials inearly 1931. BuAer’s efforts to replace its agingfleet of T4Ms and TGs would not be realizeduntil the advent of the TBD monoplane in 1937.

Martin XT6M-1

attempts to generate a replacement for the T4M/TGseries of torpedo planes. The XT6M-1 prototype, thefirst torpedo plane to feature a metal- skinned fuselageand tail group, was delivered to Anacostia for officialevaluations in December 1930. However, flight testingindicated that the type’s general performance was nobetter than, and in some instances inferior to, the TG-2, thus, no production was ordered.

Douglas T3D—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XT3D-2)

Type: Three- place torpedo planeManufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, Califor-

nia.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 800-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-54 14-

cylinder radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun,one flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to 1,000lbs. of bombs or one torpedo carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 142 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,800 ft.;combat range 748 mi.

Weights: 4,876 lbs. empty, 8,543 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 50 ft., length 35 ft. 6 in., wing area 649

sq. ft.

Ordered in June 1930, the Douglas XT3D-1 sig-nified another attempt by BuAer to find a torpedo planereplacement for the T4M/TG series. When the proto-type was delivered to NAS Anacostia for testing in Oc-tober 1931, it featured such innovations as a metal wingstructure covered by fabric and a townsend drag ringaround a single- row R-1690B Hornet engine; however,because the new type’s overall performance was onlymarginally better than the TG-2, it was returned to thefactory for modifications. The prototype reappeared inFebruary 1933 as the XT3D-2, with a twin- row R-1830

engine, NACA- type cowling, and wheel spats on thelanding gear. Although trials revealed some improve-ment in speed and range, it was not judged to be goodenough to justify placing the type in production, andfurther development was abandoned.

Consolidated BY—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XBY-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 600-hp Wright R-1820-78 9-cylinder radialdriving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard propeller.


Douglas XT3D-1

The XT3D-1 as delivered for trials in fall of 1931.Although this aircraft was returned to the factory andreappeared in early 1933 with a more powerful engine,new cowling, and spatted landing gear, no productionwas ordered.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun fired from slidingrear dorsal hatch, and up to 1,000 lbs. of bombs (est.) carried intwo internal wing bays.

Performance: Max. speed 181 mph; ceiling 22,700 ft.; range notspecified.

Weights: 3,800 lbs. empty, 6,547 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 50 ft., length 33 ft. 8 in., wing area 361 sq. ft.

The monoplane XBY-1 stands out as an anomaly amongthe various biplane dive- bomber types considered by BuAerduring the early 1930s. The airplane materialized as a directdevelopment of Consolidated’s Model 17 Fleetster 5-passengermonoplane transport, which first flown in 1930. BuAer ordered

a naval bomber variant prototype in April 1931 as the XBY-1and the aircraft was delivered for testing in September 1932.The design featured a high- mounted, cantilevered wing sup-ported by a large, spatted undercarriage, and in general appear-ance was reminiscent of the well- known Lockheed Vega,though, unlike the wooden Vega, the XBY-1 was all- metalexcept for fabric- covered control surfaces. The two bomb bays,located at about 30 percent span, were enclosed by an unortho-dox system of orange- peel- type doors. Despite being fasterthan existing biplane types, trials completed in early 1933 re-vealed that the XBY-1 was not suited for dive- bombing and toolarge for carrier stowage, thus no production was forthcoming.


Consolidated XBY-1

Great Lakes BG—1933

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (BG-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Great Lakes Aircraft Corp., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 60 (USN,USMC)Powerplant: One 750-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-82 14-cylinder radial

driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible

.30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to 1,000 lbs. of bombs carriedexternally.

Performance: Max. speed 188 mph at 8,900 ft.; ceiling 20,100 ft.; com-bat range 549 mi.


The BG holds the distinction of being the only indigenousdesign of the short- lived Great Lakes Aircraft Corporation(1928–1936) to have been built in any quantity for the Navyand Marine Corps. Designed in response to a mid–1932 BuAerrequirement for a two- place, biplane dive- bomber capable ofcarrying a 1,000-lb. bomb, the XBG-1 made its first flight inJune 1933, and soon afterward was delivered to the Navy forservice trials. A competitive fly- off conducted in late 1933 re-sulted in the XBG-1 being selected for production over the rivalConsolidated XB2Y-1. Sixty aircraft under three contracts weremanufactured by Great Lakes during 1934–1935, half of thatnumber being assigned to the Marine Corps. Production BG-1s, which began reaching operational units in October 1934,differed from the prototype in having an enclosed canopy overthe pilot and gunner/observer position.

The only frontline Navy squadron to equip with BG-1s wasVB-3A. This unit initially formed part of Ranger’s new airgroup but was later transferred to Lexington. The squadron re-

turned to Ranger in 1937 asVB-4, and in 1938, began ex-changing its BG-1s for mono-plane SB2U-1s. Two Marinesquadrons received BG-1s,VB-4M (later VMB-2) in 1935and VB-6M (later VMB-1) in1936, where they remained inactive service until 1940. Oncereleased from frontlinesquadrons, Navy and the Ma-rine BG-1s were used forutility duties at shore bases,and 22 still remained on thenaval inventory as of Decem-ber 1941.


A military adaptation of the Fleetster five-passenger transport, the one and only XBY-1 appearedfor Navy trials at Anacostia in late 1932. Bombs were carried in wing bays enclosed by orange-peeldoors.

Great Lakes BG-1

Consolidated B2Y—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XB2Y-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-64 14-cylinder radial

driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitch propeller.Armament: One fixed

forward- firing .30-cal-iber machine gun, oneflexible .30-cal. ma-chine gun in rear cock-pit, and up to 1,000 lbs.of bombs carried ex-ternally.

Performance: Max. speed182 mph at 8,900 ft.;ceiling 21,000 ft.; com-bat range 487 mi.

Weights: 3,538 lbs. empty,6,010 lbs. loaded.

Dimensions: Span 36 ft. 6in., length 27 ft. 10 in.,wing area 362 sq. ft.

After a failed effortwith the BY, Consoli-dated’s B2Y representeda more serious attempt tocompete in the Navy’snewest dive- bomber con-test. It began in mid–1932

when Consolidatedand Great Lakes wereboth invited to buildprototypes accordingto BuAer plans andspecifications for anR-1535-powered bi-plane dive- bomber ca-pable of delivering a1,000-lb. bomb. GreatLakes’ XBG-1 was de-livered to the Navy inJune 1933 and Consol-idated’s XB2Y-1 ar-rived in September.Both came in an opencockpit configurationand were extremelysimilar in appearance,differing in small de-tails like the cowling,shape of the fin andrudder, and landinggear struts. Instead ofthe more conventionalbelly crutch, the

XB2Y-1 featured a wing- shaped bomb displacement device infront of the main gear struts. During service trials that lastedinto November, the XBG-1 revealed itself to be the better bomb-ing platform of the two, and as a consequence, was selected aswinner of the competition.


A BG-1 serving with Marine squadron VMB-2 (formerly VB-4M) while attached to FMF One in San Diego.Half (30 aircraft) of all BG production was allocated to the Marine Corps. The last examples were retiredin 1940.

The XB2Y-1 as delivered for trials in September 1933. The unusual wing-shaped bomb displacementdevice, attached to a 1,000-pound bomb, is clearly visible. The XB2Y-1 and XBG-1 both were built to thesame BuAer plan.

Curtiss SBC (F12C, S4C) Helldiver—1933

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SBC-4)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Division, Buf-

falo, New York.Total produced: 270 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 950-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1820-34 9-cylinder radial

driving a three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch pro-peller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine gun and oneflexible .30-cal.machine gun in rear cockpit and up to 1,000 lbs.of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 237 mph at 15,200 ft.; cruise, 127 mph;ceiling 27,300 ft.; combat range 590 mi. (500-lb. bomb)



Consolidated XB2Y-1

The Curtiss SBC not onlybecame the last combat biplane in theactive Navy and Marine Corps inven-tory, but was the last combat biplaneof any type to be manufactured in theU.S. Arising from requirements for a retractable- gear, two- seat fighter sim-ilar to Grumman’s FF/SF series, theCurtiss design was originally com-pleted in late 1933 as a parasol- wingmonoplane under the designationXF12C-1. Because of evolving navalrequirements, the fighter designationwas changed briefly to XS4C-1, and inearly 1934, to XSBC-1. During dive- bombing tests conducted in mid–1934,the prototype was destroyed in a crashattributed to failure of the parasolwing.

In April 1935 BuAer ordered asecond prototype built in a biplaneconfiguration as the XSBC-2, and thenew aircraft arrived for testing in De-cember of the same year. The XSBC-2 was in effect a complete redesign,with revisions to the cowling, fuse -lage, and entire tail group. After achange to the 825-hp R-1535 engineand successful competitive trialsagainst the XSBF-1 and XB2G-1, Cur-tiss received a contract in August 1936to produce 83 aircraft as the SBC-3,and deliveries to fleet units com-menced in mid–1937. In early 1938Curtiss introduced the improved SBC-4, which, equipped with a 950-hp R-1820 engine plus other refinements,doubled bomb load to a more lethal1,000 lbs. Curtiss thereafter receiveda production order for 174 SBC-4s inJanuary 1938, with deliveries com-mencing in March 1939. When 50SBC-4s were diverted to France in1940, production of the Navy and Ma-rine order extended into 1941.

Starting in July 1937 and contin-uing into 1938, SBC-3s were deliv eredto VS-5 (Yorktown), VS-3 (Saratoga),and VS-6 (Enterprise). The Marinesreceived only one SBC-3 in 1938.SBC-4s initially equipped VS-2aboard Lexington in 1939 and laterVS-8 and VB-8 of the Hornet airgroup in 1941. In 1939–1940, SBC-4swere allocated in threes or fours to


Curtiss SBC-4

eleven different Naval Reserve units. TheMarine Corps received its first SBC-4 in1940, and the type was equipping VMO-151and VMO-155 by mid–1941. At the time ofthe Japanese attack on Pear Harbor, in De-cember 1941, some 69 SBC-3s and 117 SBC-4s remained in the Navy and Marine activeinventories, though none ever saw combat.After active service, a number of SBCs werethereafter used as trainers.

Vought SBU (F3U)—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SBU-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Chance Vought Division of United

Aircraft Corp., Stratford, Connecticut.Total produced (all models): 125 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-

80 14-cylinder radial driving a two- bladedHamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. ma-chine gun and one flexible .30-cal. machinegun in rear cockpit and up to 500 lbs. ofbombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 205 mph at 8,900 ft.;cruise 122 mph; ceiling 23,700 ft.; range 548mi. loaded.

Weights: 3,645 lbs. empty, 5,618 lbs. max. loaded.Dimensions: Span 33 ft. 3 in., length 27 ft. 9 in.,

wing area 327 sq. ft.

The Vought SBU was the first of the new SB- types to enter operational service and thelast type of combat aircraft with fixed- gearto be placed in production by the Navy. Itbegan life in June 1932 under the designationXF3U-1 as a two- seat fighter laid down in ac-cordance with BuAer Design 113. When theXF3U-1 prototype arrived at Anacostia fortesting in June 1933, the Navy was in theprocess of abandoning the two- seat fighterconcept, and the aircraft was returned to thefactory to be reworked as a scout- bomberwith the offer that it would most likely beplaced in production. Revisions to the basicdesign included enlarging and strengthening


Left, top: The original prototype as XF12C-1parasol wing two-seat fighter. This aircraftwas destroyed during dive tests in 1934 in acrash attributed to wing failure; left, middle:An SBC-3 belonging to Yorktown’s Air GroupCommander seen in 1940. At the time, 21 SBC-3s were serving frontline equipment in twocarrier squadrons; left, bottom: The SBC-4was the last biplane dive-bomber to be oper-ated by the Navy and Marines. Although asmall number were still in frontline units whenthe United States entered World War II, noneever saw combat.

the wings, increasing fuel capacity, and adding dive- bombingapparatus. Under the new designation XSBU-1, the prototypewas returned to the Navy in June 1934, and after changes to thevertical tail surfaces and cowling, Vought received a productionorder for 84 SBU-1s in January 1935 and deliveries began thefollowing November. A second batch of 40 aircraft was orderedin November 1936 as SBU-2s with R-1535-98 engines andminor detail changes.

VS-3B of Lexington’s air group received the first produc-tion SBU-1s in November 1935, followed by VS-2B aboardSaratoga and VS-1B aboard Ranger. Most SBU-2s never sawfrontline service but were delivered new to Navy and Marinereserve units during 1937. All SBU-1s had been retired fromfleet squadrons by the end of 1940, and SBU-2s were withdrawnfrom reserve units during 1941. Some 83 remaining SBUsfinished their career as trainers at NAS Pensacola and NASCorpus Christi.

Great Lakes B2G—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XB2G-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Great Lakes Aircraft Corp., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 1 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 750-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-82 14-cylinder radial

driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: One fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine gun, one flexible

.30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to 1,000 lbs. of bombs carriedin internal bomb bay.

Performance: Max. speed 198 mph at 8,900 ft.; ceiling 19,500 ft.; com-bat range 582 mi.


In 1934 BuAer issued nearly simultaneous requirementsfor new biplane and monoplane scout- bomber designs to beequipped with retractable landing gear. Great Lakes Aircraft,having previously achieved moderate success with its fixed-

gear BG, went back and revised the basicairframe by deepening the belly to incor-porate a Grumman- type, inward- retractinglanding gear and adding an internal bombbay. The single forward- firing gun was in-creased to .50-caliber, but other features ofthe previous BG design were retained.BuAer ordered one prototype in June 1934under the designation XB2G-1. After initialtesting at the factory in late 1935, the air-craft was delivered to the Navy for com-petitive trials.

Interestingly, Great Lakes’ chief com-petition was not the monoplanes but two


Most SBU-2s, like this example seen atNRAB New York in 1940, went directly toreserve units. SBU-1s served in carrier airgroups aboard Lexington, Saratoga, andRanger from 1935 until 1940.

Vought SBU-1


Great Lakes XB2G-1

other biplane designs, the Grumman XSBF-1 and the CurtissXSBC-2. A fly- off between the three prototypes conductedfrom late 1935 to early 1936 ultimately resulted in the selectionof the XSBC-2 for production. However, the Navy did purchasethe single XB2G-1 prototype, and it was eventually transferredto the Marine Corps, where it was used as acommand plane to tour reserve bases until1938. When Great Lakes went out of businessin 1936, Bell Aircraft acquired its manufac-turing rights, but no effort was made to con-tinue development of the former company’s dive- bomber series.

Grumman SBF—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSBF-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engineering

Corp., Bethpage, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-

72 14-cylinder radial driving a two- bladedHamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. ma-chine gun, one flexible .30-cal. machine gunin rear cockpit, and up four 500 lbs. of bombscarried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 215 mph at 15,000 ft.;ceiling 26,000 ft.; range 688 mi.

Weights: 3,395 lbs. empty, 4,442 lbs. max. loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft. 6 in., length 25 ft. 9 in., wing area 310 sq. ft.

The Grumman SBF was one of three retractable- gear bi-plane designs built for the newly created scout- bomber (SB)requirement issued by BuAer in 1934. Ordered from Grumman


The sole example of XB2G-1 in 1938 after it had been reassigned to the Marines to be used as a command plane to tour bases. GreatLakes was out of business by the end of 1936.

The sole XSBF-1 as delivered in early 1936. The aerodynamic configuration was verysimilar to Grumman’s FF/SF series. The Curtiss XSBC-2 was selected for productionover the XSBF-1 and the Great Lakes XB2G-1.


Grumman XSBF-1

in March 1935, the XSBF-1 was essentially a re- engined devel-opment of the basic SF-2 airframe having a somewhat shorter, broader- chord wing and dive- bombing apparatus. After theXSBF-1 prototype was delivered for testing in February 1936,it was subjected to competitive trials against the Great LakesXB2G-1 and Curtiss XSBC-2. In August, when the Navy an-nounced that the Curtiss entry had been selected for production,no further development of the XSBF-1 was undertaken.

Douglas TBD Devastator—1935SPECIFICATIONS (TBD-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo- bomberManufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., El

Segundo Division, El Segundo, Cali-fornia.

Total produced: 130 (USN)Powerplant: One 900-hp Pratt & Whitney

R-1830-64 14-cylinder radial drivinga three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .30-cal.rear machine gun, and up to 1,000 lbs.of bombs or one torpedo carried ex-ternally.

Performance: Max. speed 206 mph at s.1.;cruise 128 mph; ceiling 19,700 ft.;range 716 mi. (with 1,000-lb. pay-load).

Weights: 6,182 lbs. empty, 10,194 lbs.loaded.

Dimensions: Span 50 ft., length 35 ft.,wing area 422 sq. ft.

The TBD was the first type ofmonoplane combat aircraft to beplaced in production and enter servicewith the Navy. In mid–1934, to keeppace with new carrier construction andalso replace its aging fleet of T4M/TGtorpedo planes, BuAer issued a com-pletely new requirement for a torpedo- bomber (TB) type and authorized twoprototypes: a monoplane from Doug -las designated the XTBD-1 and a bi-plane from Great Lakes designated theXTBG-1. Both aircraft were to be pow-ered by an R-1830 engine, have re-tractable landing gear, and carry acrew of three. The XTBD-1 prototypewas test flown on April 15, 1935, anddelivered to Anacostia just nine dayslater. Flight trials conducted throughthe balance of 1935 indicated not onlysuperior performance over the rivalXTBG-1 biplane, but far better sta -bility and overall handling character-istics. Douglas received a contract in

February 1936 for 114 TBD-1 production models, which differedin having an uprated engine, a raised canopy enclosure, morevertical fin area, and a revised cowling. In mid–1938, after thetype had joined the fleet, 15 more TBD-1s were added to theoriginal order.

Deliveries of TBD-1s began in early October 1937 and thefirst squadron to receive the type was VT-3 of Saratoga’s airgroup. From mid–1938 onwards, TBD-1s equipped VT-2 of Lex-ington, VT-5 of Yorktown, and VT-6 of Enterprise, and finally,in late 1941, VT-8 of Hornet. TBDs were the Fleet’s standard torpedo- bomber when the U.S. entered World War II and were


Douglas TBD-1

involved in the very earliest carrieractions of 1942 against land- basedJapanese targets in the Marshall andGilbert Islands. However, in the carrier- to- carrier engagements whichfollowed, TBDs proved to be highlyvulnerable to both enemy antiaircraftfire and fighters, and during the Battleof Midway on June 4–5, 1942, 41 of47 TBDs launched were lost. Afterbeing replaced by Grumman TBFs inmid–1942, surviving TBDs served awhile longer as advanced trainers.

Great Lakes TBG—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

(XTBG-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo- bomberManufacturer: Great Lakes Aircraft

Corp., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 800-hp Pratt & Whitney

R-1830-60 14-cylinder radial drivinga three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to1,000 lbs. of bombs or one torpedocarried in internal bay.

Performance: Max. speed 185 mph at7,000 ft.; ceiling 16,400 ft.; combatrange 586 mi.


Dimensions: Span 42 ft., length 35 ft. 1in., wing area 547 sq. ft.

The TBG was the last type of torpedo- carrying biplane to be con-sidered by the Navy and the finalproduct of Great Lakes before thatcompany ceased operations. In June1934, BuAer selected Great Lakes tobuild a retractable- gear biplane torpedo- bomber prototype under thedesignation XTBG-1 in what was tobe a biplane versus monoplane fly- off. The design was essentially a fif-teen percent scale- up of the basicBG/B2G blueprint, adding a bom-bardier’s station beneath a low- profilecanopy located forward of the cabanestruts. Following delivery of theXTBG-1 prototype to Anacostia inAugust 1935, testing revealed notonly poor stability, but levels of per-formance that were generally inferior


Above: The first Navy monoplane to enter carrier service in late 1937, this TBD-1 was assignedto VT-6 of the newly formed Enterprise Air Group. All 130 had joined the fleet by the endof 1938. Below: TBD-1 of VT-2 in the Lexington Air Group, circa late 1940. The tail colorwas bright yellow. During 1941, the colorful orange-yellow and silver paint scheme on fleetaircraft was changed to overall light gray.

to Douglas’s rival XTBD-1 monoplane. Developmentwas abandoned in early 1936 and Great Lakes, lackingany production prospects, closed its doors soon afterward.

Northrop BT—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS BT-1

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Northrop Aircraft Corp. (subsidiary of

Douglas Aircraft), El Segundo, California.Total produced: 56 (USN)Powerplant: One 825-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-94 14-cylin-

der radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine gun,one flexible .30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to 1,000lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 222 mph at 9,500 ft.; cruise 192mph; ceiling 25,300 ft.; range 550 mi. loaded, 1,150 mi.max.

Weights: 4,606 lbs. empty, 7,197 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 41 ft. 6 in., length 31 ft. 8 in., wing area

319 sq. ft.

The Northrop BT is recognized as being the directprecursor to the legendary SBD Dauntless series. WhenBuAer issued a 1934 requirement for a retractable- gear,monoplane scout- bomber, Northrop responded with aslightly scaled- down version of its Army A-17 attackairplane, which itself had been derived from the Gammatransport of 1932. Unlike the fixed, spatted landing gearof production A-17s, the Navy design retained the semi- retractable gear arrangement seen on Gamma 2Fdemonstrator. It also introduced a perforated, split- typedive brake that would reduce buffeting at high divingspeeds. BuAer gave Northrop a contract in November1934 for one prototype as the XBT-1, and the aircraftmade its first flight on August 19, 1935. Following com-pletion of official trials in October 1936, the Navyawarded Northrop a contract for 54 BT-1s. While pro-duction was underway, the company commenced de-velopment of an XBT-2 variant having a bigger engineand fully flush, inward- retracting landing gear (first

developed for the Army A-17A). After thecompany was renamed Douglas Aircraft, ElSegundo Division in 1938, the XBT-2 was ul-timately placed in production as the SBD-1.

Production BT-1s first entered service inApril 1938 with VB-5, becoming part of York-town’s air wing, and in early 1939, beganequipping VB-6 of the recently commissionedEnterprise. The service career of the BT wascomparatively brief, however, the phase- out


The XTBG-1 as delivered to Anacostia in mid–1935. BuAer ordered it as a hedge against thepossibility that the monoplane Douglas TBDwould be too “hot” for carrier operations. Notebombardier’s station forward.

Great Lakes XTBG-1

commencing in early 1941 as new SBD-2s and -3s beganarriving to take their place.

Brewster SBA and Naval Aircraft Factory SBN—1936

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SBN-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Brewster Aeronautical Corp., Long Island City,

New York; and Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Penn-sylvania.

Total produced: 31 (USN)Powerplant: One 950-hp Wright R-1820-38 9-cylinder radial

driving a three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitchpropeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine gun, oneflexible .30-cal. rear machine gun, and one 500-lb. bombcarried in internal bay.

Performance: Max. speed 254 mph at 15,200 ft.; cruise 117 mph;ceiling 28,300 ft.; range 1,110 mi. max.

Weights: 4,503 lbs. empty, 6,759 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 39 ft., length 27 ft. 8 in., wing area 259 sq.

ft.

The SBA was the first original aircraft design of thecontroversial Brewster Aeronautical Corp. Though Brew-ster’s roots were traceable to a 19th century horse carriagebusiness, the company in truth had been completely re-structured in 1932 with the principal aim of obtainingNavy aircraft contracts. Having no business of its own atthe time, Brewster commenced operations by performingsubcontract work for Vought and Grumman. When BuAercirculated a requirement for a new monoplane scout- bomber (SB) in mid–1934, Brewster was invited to submita proposal based upon a somewhat different specification.Unlike Vought’s XSB2U-1 and Northrop’s XBT-1, Brew-ster’s XSBA-1 would be a mid- wing design incorporatingan internal bomb bay and using the larger diameter R-1820 powerplant. Brewster received a contract to con-

struct a single prototype in October 1934 andthe completed aircraft was delivered to theNavy for tests in April 1936.

Early trials revealed less than expectedperformance, causing the prototype to be re-turned to the factory for modifications. Whenthe XSBA-1 reappeared in 1937 with an uprated engine, revised cowling, three- bladedpropeller, and raised canopy, top speed hadrisen to 263 mph, the fastest of any mono-plane SB type thus far tested. BuAer awardeda contract to manufacture 30 airplanes inSeptember 1938, not to Brewster however, but


A BT-1 of VB-5 attached to Yorktown in 1938.Detail of split-type dive brakes shows to goodadvantage. A more powerful engine, flush-folding landing gear, plus other improvementsturned the BT into the legendary SBD.

Northrop BT-1


Brewster/NAF SBN-1

to the government- owned NAF plant as the SBN-1. Since bythat time Brewster was heavily occupied with the F2A-1 fighterproject, BuAer reasoned that the company lacked plant capacityto produce the XSBA-1 in quantity. Ironically, NAF’s productionproceeded at such a lethargic rate that the first SBN-1s were

not delivered until late 1940 andthe balance of the contract was notcompleted until early 1942, bywhich time the type was alreadyobsolete. SBN-1s served brieflywith VB-3 of Saratoga’s air groupand were later used as trainers byVT-8 aboard Hornet.

Vought SB2U Vindicator—1936

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS(SB2U-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Chance Vought Di vi -

sion of United Aircraft Corp.,Stratford, Connecticut.

Total produced: 170 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 825-hp Pratt & Whit-

ney R-1535-96 14-cylinder radialdriving a two- bladed HamiltonStandard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing.50-cal. machine gun and oneflex ible .30-cal. machine gun inrear cockpit and up to 1,000 lbs.of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 250 mph at9,500 ft.; cruise 143 mph; ceiling27,400 ft.; range 635 mi. (1,000-lb. payload).

Weights: 4,676 lbs. empty, 7,278 lbs.max. loaded.


Following the Douglas TBDby two months, the Vought SB2Uwas the first monoplane scout- bomber to join the fleet. Orderedby BuAer in October 1934, theXSB2U-1 was one of seven scout- bomber prototypes authorized thatyear (i.e., the XBT-1 and XSBA-1monoplane designs, plus theXB2G-1, XSBC-2, XSBF-1, andXSB3U-1 biplane designs). Bydoing this, BuAer hoped to solvetwo problems at once: find outwhether or not monoplanes couldbe safely operated from carriers;and regardless of outcome, obtainnew airplanes to equip the Navy’s

growing carrier force. The design of the XSB2U-1 mixed neweraerodynamic ideas with older construction methods, appearingwith fabric covering on the aft fuselage and on the wings aftof the main spars. The prototype made its first flight on Janu-ary 4, 1936 and was delivered to Anacostia three months later.


Top: A Brewster XSBA-1 prototype seen at Anacostia in 1937 following modifications. Produc-tion, as the SBN-1, was given to the Naval Aircraft Factory because of Brewster’s limited plantcapacity. Bottom: One of thirty SBN-1s built by the Naval Aircraft Factory from 1939 to 1942.The type was virtually obsolete by the time it reached operational units. Served very brieflywith VB-3 of the Saratoga Air Group.


Vought SB2U-3

In trials conducted through the sum-mer of 1936, the monoplanes clearlyoutperformed the biplanes in termsof speed (and thus time to target) andclimb, while still demonstrating ac-ceptable approach speeds and wave- off characteristics.

In October 1936, Vought re -ceived a production order for 54SB2U-1s, and deliveries to fleet unitsbegan in December 1937. A secondbatch of 58 aircraft was ordered inJanuary 1938 as the SB2U-2, withchanges in equipment and a small in-crease in gross weight, and enteredservice later the same year. The finalversion, ordered in September 1939as the SB2U-3, came with an upratedR-1535-102 engine, increased fuel ca-pacity, and a .50-cal. gun in the rearposition. Nearly all of the 57 SB2U-3s produced were allocated to theMarine Corps in 1940–1941. OneSB2U-1 was modified as a floatplanebut no production was undertaken.Vought also built two export versions,20 to the French in 1939 as the V-156-F3 and 50 to the Royal Navy under Lend- Lease in 1941 as the V-156-B1.

The first production SB2U-1sequipped VB-3 of the Saratoga airgroup, followed by Lexington’s VB-2. By early 1940, SB2U-1s and -2swere also serving with VB-4(Ranger) and VS-72 (Wasp, commis-sioned April 1940). Although SB2Uswere still equipping the Ranger andWasp air groups when the war brokeout in December 1941, none were everinvolved in combat actions. VMSB-231, one of two Marine squadrons op-erating SB2U-3s, flew combat sortiesagainst the Japanese fleet from Mid-way Island in June 1942, but the typewas soon replaced by SBDs in front-line units. After active service, anumber of SB2Us were used in theAdvanced Carrier Training Groups(ACTGs).


Above: The Fleet’s first monoplane dive-bomber, these SB2U-1s are seen serving with VB-3in the Saratoga Air Group in 1938. Most had been replaced by SBDs by the time the UnitedStates entered World War II. Below: An overall gray Marine SB2U-3 seen in June 1941 inVMS-1 markings just before the change to VMSB-131. The only unit to employ SB2U-3s incombat was Midway-based VMSB-231 in 1942.

Vought SB3U—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSB3U-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Chance Vought Division of United Air-

craft Corp., Stratford, Connecticut.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 750-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-82 14-

cylinder radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Stan-dard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machinegun and one flexible .30-cal. machine gun in rearcockpit and up to 500 lbs. of bombs carried exter-nally.

Performance: Max. speed 215 mph at 8,900 ft.; ceiling26,500 ft.; range 590 mi.

Weights: 3,876 lbs. empty, 5,837 lbs. max. loaded.Dimensions: Span 33 ft. 3 in., length 28 ft. 2 in., wing

area 327 sq. ft.

Produced in parallel to the monoplane SB2U,the biplane SB3U was perhaps the most extreme

example of BuAer’s official ambivalence toward the suitabilityof monoplanes for carrier operations. In February 1935, fourmonths after authorizing three scout- bomber monoplane pro-totypes, BuAer ordered a retractable- gear biplane from Voughtunder the designation XSB3U-1. Utilizing the same basic air-frame and engine as the SBU-2, the XSB3U-1 incorporated a rearward- folding landing gear and a somewhat longer chordcowling. It is noteworthy that the XSB2U-1 and XSB3U-1 pro-totypes were completed and delivered to Anacostia at the sametime. Trials held between the two types unquestionablyconfirmed the superiority of the monoplane’s aerodynamics:though 500 lbs. heavier and dimensionally larger than theXSB3U-1, the monoplane XSB2U-1, equipped with an identicalpower plant, was nonetheless faster by 15 mph, had similarrange, and could carry twice the bomb load, while exhibitingthe same 66 mph stall speed. The sole XSB3U-1 prototype wasretained at Anacostia for test purposes until 1938.

Douglas SBD Dauntless—1938TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SBD-2)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Company, El Segundo Division, El

Segundo, California.Total produced: 4,899 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 1,000-hp Wright R-1820-32 9-cylinder radial driving

a three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns, two flex-

ible .30-cal. rear machine guns, and up to 2,000 lbs. of bombscarried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 252 mph at 16,000 ft.; cruise 148 mph;ceiling 26,000 ft.; range 1,370 mi. max., 1,225 mi. loaded.

Weights: 6,293 lbs. empty, 10,360 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 41 ft. 6 in., length 33 ft., wing area 325 sq. ft.

Although BuAer viewed the SBD as a stopgap designwhen it entered service in 1940, it was destined to become, interms of tactical success, the most important Navy and Marine


The sole XSB3U-1 prototype as seen at Anacostia in 1936, delivered the samemonth as the XSB2U-1. This probably represents one of the best examples ofofficial Navy reluctance toward monoplane carrier aircraft.

Vought XSB3U-1


Douglas SBD-1

Corps dive- bomber type of WorldWar II. The origins of the SBD re-late back to BuAer’s 1934 require-ment for a monoplane scout- bomber, which resulted, amongother things, in a production con-tract being given to Northrop in late1936 for its BT-1. At the timeNorthrop’s name changed to Doug-las Aircraft, El Segundo Divisionin 1938, the firm was about to com-plete work on its XBT-2, an im-proved derivative having a 1,000-hp. R-1820-32 engine and aredesigned landing gear that re-tracted flush into the wing roots.The plane made its first flight inApril 1938, and further refinementssuch as a reshaped fin/rudder and anew canopy enclosure created anew model that was ordered intoproduction in 1939 as the SBD-1.

BuAer had originally contem-plated terminating SBD productionin early 1942 at 174 (i.e., 57 SBD-1s, 87 SBD-2s, and 30 SBD-3s) butthe intervention of World War IIkept the assembly line moving untilmid–1944, resulting in a further470 SBD-3s, 780 SBD-4s, 3,025SBD-5s, and finally, 450 SBD-6s.Another 953 were completed forthe AAF as the A-24 (SBD-3), A-24A (SBD-4), and A-24B (SBD-5). The SBD series was continuallyimproved during its production life:the SBD-2 included hydraulicallyactuated landing gear; the SBD-3, self- sealing tanks, protectivearmor, and forward guns increasedfrom .30-caliber to .50-caliber; theSBD-4, a 24-volt electrical system;the SBD-5, 1,200-hp. R-1820-60engine, reshaped cowling, and reflector- type gun/bombsight; andSBD-6, 1,350-hp. R-1820-66 en-gine.

All SBD-1s were assigned tothe Marine Corps (VMB-2 in 1940and VMB-1 in 1941) and in 1941,SBD-2s first equipped VB-6 andVS-6 aboard Enterprise and VB-2aboard Lexington. SBD-3s beganarriving in mid–1941 and by De-cember, were replacing SBCs and


Top: The first Marine monoplane combat aircraft of any type. In early 1941, these SBD-1sreplaced the BG-1s of MCAS Quantico-based VMB-1 (reclassified VMSB-132 in late 1941).Bottom: An overall light gray SBD-3 seen at the Douglas plant in the summer of 1941. As theyentered service, SBD-3s replaced SBC-3s and -4s, BT-1s, and SB2U-1s in six carrier squadronsbefore the end of 1941.

SB2Us in air groups aboard Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown,and Enterprise.

Curtiss SB2C Helldiver—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSB2C-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Airplane Division, Columbus,

OhioTotal produced: 7,203 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 1,700-hp Wright R-2600-8 14-cylinder radial driving

a three- bladed Curtiss Electric fully reversible, constant- speedpropeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .50 cal. machine guns in the nose,two flexible .30-cal. machine guns in rear cockpit, and up to 1,000lbs. of bombs carried in an internal bay.

Performance: Max. speed 322 mph at 14,600 ft.; cruise, 155 mph;ceiling 29,975 ft.; combat range 996 mi. (1,000-lb. payload).

Weights: 7,122 lbs. empty, 10,859 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 49 ft. 9 in., length 35 ft. 4 in., wing area 422 sq. ft.

The Curtiss SB2C, after a protracted development period,became the Navy’s chief scout- bomber from late 1943 until the


Curtiss XSB2C-1

end of World War II, replacing Douglas SBDs in carrier- basedcombat operations. In May 1939, under requirements compa-rable to Brewster’s XSB2A-1, BuAer ordered an R-2600-pow-ered scout- bomber prototype from Curtiss under thedesignation XSB2C-1. As part of the general naval expansiontriggered by the European war and increasing friction withJapan, the SB2C-1 was ordered into large- scale production inNovember 1940 even before a prototype had flown. In order toincrease plant capacity, Curtiss established a new factory forSB2C production at Columbus, Ohio.

The program received a severe setback when the XSB2C-1 was destroyed in a crash only days after its first flight on De-cember 18, 1940. Due to extensive revisions to the basic design,which included enlarging the vertical tail surfaces, lengtheningthe fuselage, and adding armor protection and self- sealing fueltanks, the first production model did not fly until June 1942.And with more than 800 design changes required, theColumbus plant fell seriously behind on its productionschedule, so that deliveries of the first SB2C-1s to operationalunits was delayed until December 1942 and the type not didenter combat until late 1943. To keep up with wartime demand,SB2Cs were ultimately license- produced by Canadian Car &Foundry (as the SBF) and Fairchild of Canada (as the SBW).The type remained in frontline Navy service until 1949.

Brewster SB2A Buccaneer—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSB2A-1)

Type: Two- place dive- bomberManufacturer: Brewster Aeronautical Corp., Johnsville Division,

Johnsville, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 301 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 1,700-hp Wright R-2600-8 14-cylinder radial driving

a three- bladed Curtiss Electric fully reversible, constant- speedpropeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine guns in fuselage,two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns in wings, two flex-ible .30-cal. machine guns in rear cockpit, and one 1,000-lb. bombin internal bay.

Performance: Max. speed 311 mph at 15,000 ft.; cruise 157 mph; ceiling27,000 ft.; range 1,570 mi. max., 980 mi. loaded.


Despite having three new types of monoplane scout- bombers in production, BuAer had determined by early 1939that larger, more powerful designs would be needed to equipthe Navy’s emerging carrier force. In April 1939, Brewster wasselected to build a prototype of its proposed Model 340 underthe designation XSB2A-1. Taking much from its SBA prede-cessor, the XSB2A-1 evolved as a mid- wing design having inward- retracting landing gear, an internal weapons bay, andprovision for an enclosed dorsal turret. In December 1940, tospeed preparations, BuAer authorized Brewster to proceed withproduction of 140 SB2A-1s before the prototype had flown. Thecompany also obtained orders from Great Britain and theNetherlands for 912 export models as the Bermuda and Model340D, respectively. Mass production of the new type was totake place at Brewster’s new plant in Johnsville, Pennsylvania.

The XSB2A-1 flew for the first time on June 17, 1941, ap-pearing with a dummy dorsal turret aft of the cockpit. Newcombat requirements and testing necessitated lengthening thefuselage one foot two inches, replacing the turret with a flexiblegun mount, revising the canopy, increasing fin area, and in-stalling armor and self- sealing tanks, which upped emptyweight nearly 3,000 lbs. and seriously degraded expected per-formance in terms of speed, range, and payload. Meanwhile,


The XSB2C-1 prototype made its first flight in December 1940. Already ordered into production, 800 design changes were madebefore the first production model flew in July 1942.

mismanagement problems ledto a Navy takeover (by Presi-dential order) of all Brewsterplants in April 1942. Althoughsome 80 SB2A-2s, 60 SB2A-3s and 162 SB2A-4s were de-livered to the Navy and Ma -rines during 1943 and 1944,none was ever used in com-bat.

Grumman TBF (TBM) Avenger—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XTBF-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo- bomberManufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp., Bethpage, New

York.Total produced: 8,810 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 1,700-hp Wright R-2600-8 14-cylinder radial driving

a three- bladed Hamilton Standard fully reversible, constant- speedpropeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun in nose,one flexible .50-cal. machine gun in dorsal power turret, one flex-ible .30-cal. machine gun in ventral position, one torpedo or upto 2,000 lbs. of bombs carried in an internal bay.

Performance: Max. speed 271 mph at 12,000 ft.; cruise 145 mph; ceiling22,400 ft.; range 1,450 mi. max., 1,215 mi. loaded.

Weights: 10,080 lbs. empty, 15,905 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 54 ft. 2 in., length 40 ft., wing area 490 sq. ft.

The TBF series (later produced by General Motors as theTBM) is universally regarded as having been the mostsuccessful Navy and Marine Corps torpedo- bomber design ofthe World War II era. Its origins can be traced to a BuAer re-quirement issued in early 1940 for a TBD replacement havingmore horsepower, improved speed, range, and payload, plusmuch better defensive protection. To eliminate the drag of ex-ternal stores, particularly torpedoes, BuAer also specified thatthe new type be designed with an internal bomb bay. Proposalswere received from Grumman and Vought, and in April 1940prototypes for both were ordered as the XTBF-1 and XTBU-1,respectively. The Navy was in such a hurry to obtain new torpedobombers that 286 TBF-1s were ordered before the firstprototype had flown.

The XTBF-1 made its first flight on August 1, 1941, andservice trials were completed by December. In early January1942, the war emergency generated an order for an additional1,600 TBF-1s, and added to that, a contract was given to theEastern Aircraft Division of General Motors to build many


Brewster XSB2A-1

An XSB2A-1 as seen in itsoriginal configuration withdummy turret in mid–1941. Acombination of design changesand corporate mismanage-ment delayed deliveries until1943. The plane was neverused in combat.

more under license as the TBM-1 (and lateras the improved TBM-3). Production TBF-1s began replacing Douglas TBDs in frontlinetorpedo squadrons during the spring of 1942,but not in time to participate in the battles ofCoral Sea and Midway. Later TBM variantsremained in service until 1954.

Vought TBU (TBY) Sea Wolf—1941

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XTBU-1)

Type: Three- place torpedo- bomberManufacturer: Chance Vought Division of UnitedAircraft Corp., Stratford, Connecticut.Total produced: 182 (USN)

Powerplant: One 2,000-hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-20 18-cylin-der radial driving a three- bladed Hamilton Standard fullyreversible, constant- speed propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine gun, one.50-cal machine gun in power- operated dorsal turret, oneflexible .30-cal. machine gun in ventral tunnel, and up to2,000 lbs. of bombs or one torpedo carried in an internalbay.

Performance: Max. speed 311 mph at 14,700 ft.; cruise 165 mph;ceiling 27,900 ft.; range 1,400 mi. loaded.

Weights: 10,504 lbs. empty, 16,247 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 57 ft. 2 in., length 39 ft., wing area 439 sq.

ft.

But for the aircraft production priorities dictated byAmerica’s sudden entry into World War II, the TBU mighthave shared billing with Grumman’s famous TBF as oneof the Navy’s top combat aircraft of the wartime period.By 1940 the Navy was planning a massive expansion ofits carrier force and needed many aircraft to equip newair groups, and its standard torpedo- bomber, the DouglasTBD, was rapidly approaching obsolescence. Early thesame year, BuAer had issued requirements for a new torpedo- bomber having better speed, payload, and defen-sive armament and in April, authorized prototypes to bebuilt by both Grumman and Vought as the XTBF-1 andXTBU-1, respectively.

As the design evolved, the XTBU-1 shared the mid- wing over bomb bay layout of the XTBF-1 while possess-ing a smaller fuselage cross- section and 10 percent lesswing area. After the XTBU-1 prototype flew on December22, 1941 (six months after the XTBF-1), testing revealedgeneral performance equal to or better than the TBF; how-ever, due to the priority placed upon F4U production,Vought lacked plant capacity to mass- produce another air-craft. Therefore, in September 1943, license- production


The XTBF-1 prototype flew for the first timeon August 1, 1941. This factory publicity pho-tograph of this early production TBF-1 wasprobably taken in late 1941 or early 1942.Entered combat in June 1942.

Grumman XTBF-1


Vought XTBU-1

rights were transferred to Consolidated- Vultee, including a con-tract to manufacture 1,100 aircraft as the TBY-2, though only180 had been delivered by the time the war ended and the bal-ance of the order was cancelled. The last examples were with-drawn in 1947.

Douglas BD (XF-3)—1941

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (BD-1 [XF-3])

Type: Four- place landplane light bomberManufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Company, El Se-

gundo Division, El Segundo, California.Total produced: 9 (USN/USMC)Powerplants: Two turbo- supercharged 1,700-hp

Wright R-2600-7 Double Cyclone 14-cylinderradials driving three- bladed Hamilton Standardfully reversible, constant- speed propellers.

Armament: Four forward- firing .30-cal. machineguns, two flexible .30-cal machine guns in dorsalmount, one flexible .30-cal. machine gun in ven-tral tunnel (bomb racks removed to allow instal-lation of T-3A cameras in bomb bay).

Performance: Max. speed 388 mph at 20,000 ft.;cruise 218 mph; ceiling 31,500 ft.; range 767 mi.loaded, 1,100 mi. max.

Weights: 15,051 lbs. empty, 20,329 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 61 ft. 4 in., length 47 ft. 7 in., wing

area 464 sq. ft.

Whether or not the Douglas BD-1 was ac-tually in the Navy’s possession before the endof 1941 may be conjectural, however, it does ap-pear on the year- end inventory as Bureau Num-

ber 4251, assigned to the Naval Proving Ground in Dahlgren,Virginia. This aircraft was one of three Army Model, turbo- supercharger- equipped A-20 prototypes modified during 1940for high- speed photo- reconnaissance under the AAC


An XTBU-1 seen at the Vought plant in December 1941, delivered to NAS Anacostia in March 1942. Production was eventually shiftedto Consolidated as the TBY-2.

The XF-3 still in Air Corps markings. The plane was acquired by Navy in late1941 as the BD-1 to be evaluated for shore-based Marine combat operations. EightA-20Bs were later transferred to the Marines as the BD-2 and employed as targettugs.

designation XF-3. One historical source indicates that the planehad originally been procured with the aim of evaluating its po-tential as a Marine Corps land- based bomber. In late 1942 andearly 1943, the Navy also acquired eight ex–AAF A-20Bs withnon– turbo- charged R-2600-3 engines as the BD-2, which, asthey were delivered, transferred into Marine service and sub-sequently employed as high- speed target tugs in the Base Avi-ation Detachment at MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina. Al-

though multiple variants of the A-20 saw wide combat use dur-ing World War II with the AAF, RAF, British Com mon wealthNations, and Soviet Air Force, the type was never used in suchcapacity by the Navy or the Marines. From 1943 onwards, how-ever, the Navy did procure some 706 North American B-25sin five different variants, with most being assigned to Marinebombing squadrons in the southwest and central Pacific combattheaters of the war.


Douglas BD-1

FIGHTER AIRCRAFT

Synopsis of Fighter AircraftProcurement

Although single- seat fighters had seen some use with land- based Marine Corps forces, their air superiority role—pro -tecting the fleet from air attack—did not become relevant untilthey had been adapted to deploy from ships, either float- equipped variants carried by capital ships or wheeled typeslaunched from aircraft carriers. From 1927 onwards, once Lan-gley’s participation in early fleet problems had established thetactical efficacy of carrier- based fighters over floatplanefighters, virtually all of BuAer’s fighter procurement efforts be-came focused on acquiring wheeled types equipped with ar-resting gear. Within the same timeframe, BuAer refined its car-rier fighter specifications to require air- cooled radial enginesand include the ability to carry bombs in a light attack role.

As Naval Aviation moved into the decade of the 1930s,BuAer was faced with the dilemma that its biplane carrierfighters would soon be obsolete in light of recent aeronauticaladvances. At the same time, the higher takeoff and landingspeeds of new monoplanes like the Army’s Boeing P-26 wereseen as posing serious problems for carrier operations. A loadedaircraft, even a small fighter, required relatively light wing load-ing in order to safely fly off the deck in moderate winds, andmore to the point, aviation officials believed that the higher ap-proach and stall speeds of monoplanes would produce danger-ous wave- off and go- around characteristics. The Navy did goso far as to evaluate four different monoplane fighter prototypesbetween 1930 and 1935—Boeing F5B, Boeing F7B, CurtissF13C, and Northrop FT—but none were rated as satisfactoryfor operational use.

From 1932 to 1936, instead of monoplanes, BuAer orderednew biplanes with better streamlining and retractable landinggear such as the Grumman FF/SF, Curtiss BF2C, GrummanF2F and F3F. Almost out of desperation, two Army monoplanefighter types—the Curtiss H75B (Y1P-36) and Seversky NF-1(P-35)—were acquired for testing in 1936 and 1937, however,both were rejected. BuAer did not move forward with definiteplans to acquire any type of monoplane fighter for operationalduty aboard carriers until June 1938 when it awarded Brewstera production contract for 54 F2A-1s. This move was followedquickly in February 1939 by an order for another productionbatch of monoplane fighters, this time to Grumman for 78 F4F-3s. But the reequipping process proved to be very slow,Brewster and Grumman both being hindered by commitmentsto divide production of new aircraft between the Navy and for-eign air arms (e.g., primarily Great Britain, France, and theNetherlands).

But even before testing of the F2A and F4F proceededvery far, BuAer officials were already at work formulating moreambitious plans to acquire yet a second generation ofmonoplane fighters for the anticipated expansion of the carrierfleet. During 1938 contacts were issued to Grumman for the

XF5F, to Vought for the XF4U, and to Bell for the XFL, andall three prototypes were flying by the spring of 1940. Mean-while, naval planners had scrutinized intelligence reports of airfighting in Europe and the Far East which strongly suggestedthat these new fighters would be highly vulnerable in combat.To survive against the most modern adversaries (e.g., Messer-schmitt bf 109E, Mitsubishi A6M1), fighters needed better over-all performance, heavier gun armament, self- sealing fuel tanks,and armor protection in vital places. Ironically, the only one ofthe three selected for production, Vought’s F4U, was forced toundergo design changes of such extent that its introduction to carrier- based combat operations was delayed, ultimately, untilmid–1944, by which time Grumman’s F6F, ordered in June 1941and flown in June 1942, had already established itself as thefleet’s standard shipboard fighter.

Thomas- Morse MB-3 (1919)TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Single- place landplane fighterManufacturer: Thomas- Morse Aircraft Corp., Ithaca, New York.Total produced: 11 (USMC)Powerplant: One 300-hp Wright- Hispano 8-cylinder water- cooled in-

line engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns.Performance: Max. speed 152 mph at s.1.; ceiling 24,900 ft.; range 288

mi.


Thomas Morse MB-3

Weights: 1,506 lbs. empty, 2,094 lbs.gross.


Developed for the Army andflown for the first time in 1919, the Thomas- Morse MB-3 was a two- baybiplane of fabric- covered woodenconstruction whose general structuraldesign had been derived from theFrench Spad VII and XIII. Perform-ance of the Army’s MB-3 was shownto be superior to that of various foreign- built fighter types evaluatedby the Navy shortly after World WarI (e.g., Hanriot HD-1, Nieuport 28,R.A.F S.E.5a, and Sopwith Camel).Eleven ex–Army MB-3s transferredto the Navy Department in 1921 wereassigned to the Marine Corps in Jan-uary 1922, and thereafter formed theearliest Marine fighter unit at Quantico, Virginia,where they served until being replaced by BoeingFB-1s in late 1925 and early 1926.

Naval Aircraft Factory TF—1920TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Three- place escort fighter.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Penn-

sylvania.Total produced: 4 (USN)Powerplant: Two 300-hp Wright- Hispano H-3 8-cylinder

water- cooled inline engines driving four- bladedwooden fixed- pitch propellers.

Armament: Two flexible Lewis .30-cal. machine guns inthe bow and one flexible Lewis .30-cal. machine gunin the rear cockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 95 mph; ceiling 13,000 ft; range650 mi.

Weights: 5,575 lbs. empty, 8,846 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span (upper) 60 ft., length 44 ft., wing area

930 sq. ft.

The origins of the TF (Tandem Fighter) can betraced to a 1918 requirement issued by the BritishTechnical Committee for a long- range sea- bornefighter to escort patrol aircraft (H-16s, F-5s, etc.) onmaritime sorties.

After the armistice, Navy officials retained suf-ficient interest in the idea to authorize NAF to pro-ceed with design proposals. After reviewing variousoptions, the Navy approved a twin- tandem enginedesign that incorporated a hull and tailplane boomarrangement nearly identical to the larger NC seriesand authorized construction of four prototypes.Originally, the TF was to have been powered by Curtiss- built 400-hp Kirkham engines, however, me-


Eleven MB-3As transferred to the Navy from the Army Air Service in 1921 and formed theearliest Marine fighter unit (Third Air Squadron) at Quantico, Virginia.

Naval Aircraft Factory TF

chanical problems with the powerplantsled to a decision to substitute less pow-erful Wright- Hispanos. Construction ofthe first prototype commenced in August1919 and the first flight took place on Oc-tober 1, 1920. Testing revealed poor han-dling characteristics plus a marked ten-dency of the engines to overheat at highRPM settings. Although three more pro-totypes were completed and tested during1921 and 1922, results were still rated asunsatisfactory, and the program was for-mally cancelled in January 1923. Thefourth prototype was reportedly com-pleted with 400-hp Packard 1-A V-12 en-gines, but no performance data on it wasreported.

Naval Aircraft Factory/Curtiss TS (F4C)—1922

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: One- place landplane and seaplane fighter.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

and Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 45 (USN)Powerplant: One 200-hp Lawrence J-1 (later Wright J-4) 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun.Performance: Max. speed 123 mph at s.1.; ceiling 16,250 ft; range 482

mi.Weights: 1,240 lbs. empty, 2,133 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 25 ft., length 22 ft. 1 in., wing area 228 sq. ft.

The TS is noteworthy in having been the first Navy fighteractually designed to a naval specification. In 1921, while em-ployed by the newly established Naval Bureau of Aeronautics,engineer Rex Beisel (who later rose to fame designing aircraftfor Curtiss and later still, Vought) laid down a design for a com-pact fighter to be powered by the new Lawrence air- cooledradial engine and convertible to wheels or floats as with mostnaval aircraft of the period. The design was characterized by alower wing slung below the fuselage on cabane struts and theuse of W- type interplane struts in place of rigging wires. An-other interesting feature was the location of the fuel tank in adeep lower wing center- section. BuAer assigned constructionto both NAF and Curtiss, and the first of 24 Curtiss- built TS-1s was flown on May 9, 1922. (Note, TS was apparently usedas a one- time designation for “convertible fighter.”) Of the fiveaircraft completed by NAF the same year, four were used asengine testbeds, two TS-2s with 240-hp Aeromarine inlinesand two TS-3s with 180-hp Wright- Hispano inlines, and oneTS-3 was further modified as the TR-3 Navy racer of 1923.

In late 1922, after being outfitted with arresting gear, thefirst Curtiss TS-1 commenced operational trials aboard the car-


One of four TFs seen at the Naval Aircraft Factory in Philadelphia. The concept behindthe design originally envisaged escorting larger flying boats like the H-16 and F-5L onmaritime patrol.

Curtiss TS-1

rier Langley, and production TS-1s afterward formed VF-1, theNavy’s first carrier- based fighter squadron. Float- equipped TS-1s also operated from various battleships as detachments ofVO-1. In early 1924, Curtiss received a contract to build an im-proved TS variant that featured an all- metal, fabric- covered air-frame designed by Charles W. Hall (who later founded HallAluminum Aircraft Co.) and a more conventional, bottom- mounted lower wing configuration. Two of the new types, des-ignated F4C-1 (note, preceding number sequence assigned to

the RC, R2C, and R3C racers), were delivered to the Navy fortesting in late 1924, but no production was ordered. The Navybegan phasing- out its TS-1s during 1925 as newer fighters cameinto service (e.g., Boeing FB and Curtiss F6C), and the last ex-amples were withdrawn from frontline units during 1926 butserved in four different reserve units until 1928.


Top: The first fighter type actually designed to a naval specification. Float equipped TS-1s served aboard battleships while wheeledvariants formed VF-1, the Navy first carrier-based fighter contingent. Bottom: The F4C-1 was an all-metal derivative of the TS-1designed by Charles W. Hall to provide comparative data on the performance, strength, and cost of metal airframe structures.

Boeing FB—1925

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (FB-5)

Type: One- place landplane and carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 40 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 525-hp Packard 2A-1500 12-cylinder water- cooled

inline engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Armament: One .50-cal. and one .30-cal. fixed forward- firing machine

guns.Performance: Max. speed 169 mph at s.1.; ceiling 20,200 ft; range 323

mi.


Appearing as a navalized version of the PW-9 first testedby the Army in 1923, BuAer ordered 16 aircraft from Boeingin late 1924 to be delivered under the designation FB-1, althoughthe contract was later limited to the 10 examples accepted inDecember 1925. Virtual duplicates of PW-9s powered by 435-hp Curtiss D-12 inline engines, all FB-1s were all allocated tothe Marine Corps following delivery, initially serving with VF-1M, VF-2M, and VF-3M. In 1927, nine of the fighters were as-


Boeing FB-5

signed to the newly formed VF-10M, where they served withthe Marine Expeditionary Force in China, and the tenth wentto VO-8M in San Diego. Boeing modified two FBs withstrengthened airframes, cross- axle landing gear, and carrier ar-resting equipment, which were delivered for testing as FB-2s,followed by three FB-3s powered by 525-hp Packard engineand having fittings for floats. One FB airframe served as an en-gine testbed for air- cooled radial engines, initially as the FB-4

with a 450-hp Wright, then later, as the FB-6, with a 400-hpPratt & Whitney R-1340.

The next true production version was the FB-5, flown forthe first time on October 7, 1926. In addition to the improve-ments of the Packard- powered FB-3, the FB-5 possessed a bal-anced rudder and increased wing stagger with the top winghaving been moved forward and the lower wing aft. Followingacceptance trials, BuAer ordered 27 more of the type, and the


Top: Essentially identical to the Army PW-9, all FB-1s were allocated to the Marines. This photograph depicts an FB-1 serving withQuantico-based VF-2M in 1926. The circle around the “F” distinguished a Marine unit. Bottom: One of 13 FB-5s assigned to VF-6Baboard Langley in 1927. Interestingly, Boeing delivered the new aircraft to Langley via barge, and their first flights were made fromthe carrier’s deck.

method of delivery, made about a year later on January 21, 1927,was very unusual: Boeing, whose Seattle plant abuts PugetSound, loaded all 27 planes onto barges and moved them outto the carrier Langley waiting nearby, where they were hoistedaboard and made their first flights from the carrier’s deck. FB-5s initially joined VF-1B and VF-6B of Langley’s Air Group,but some later served with VF-3B aboard the new carrier Lex-ington. After leaving active Navy service during 1928, at leastsix FB-5s continued with Marine Squadron VF-6M until some-time in 1929.

Curtiss F6C—1925TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F6C-3 [F6C-4])

Type: One- place landplane and carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 79 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 400-hp Curtiss D-12 12-cylinder water- cooled in-

line engine [410-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340 Wasp 9-cyliner air- cooled radial engine] driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal pro-peller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns.Performance: Max. speed 154 mph [155 mph] at s.1.; ceiling

20,300 [22,900] ft.; range 351 [362] mi.Weights: 2,161 lbs. [1,980 lbs.] empty, 3,349 lbs. [3,171 lbs.]

loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft. 6 in., length 22 ft. 10 in. [22 ft. 6

in.], wing area 252 sq. ft.

Competing head- to- head with Boeing, Curtissgained status during the 1920s as a leading supplier offighter aircraft to both the Army and the Navy.

In January 1925, only a month after the companyhad delivered the PW-8B prototype to the Army (sub-sequently ordered into production as the P-1), BuAerawarded it a contract to manufacture nine very similaraircraft under the designation F6C-1 (note, F5C notused). The F6C-1s, when they arrived in mid–1925,were convertible to floats but not equipped for carrieroperations, however, the four F6C-2s that followed inlate 1925, possessed straight- axle landing gear,stronger wing bracing, and carrier arresting equip -ment, and were thus assigned to VF-2 aboard Langley.Following suc cessful carrier trials with the F6C-2s,BuAer awarded Curtiss a production contact for 35nearly identical F6C-3s, with deliveries starting in January 1927. F6C-3s first entered service with VF-2B of Langley’s Air Group, then later equippedVF-5S in two detachments aboard the new carriersLexington and Saratoga, and the type also went intoservice with Marine squadron VF-8M at Quantico in1928.

In 1926, BuAer adopted a policy of specifying air- cooled radial engines for all new naval aircraft, thusone F6C-1 became the F6C-4 prototype after being re-worked for installation of Pratt & Whitney’s new Waspengine (note, experimental X prefix was not adopteduntil 1927). While the change in overall per formance

over water- cooled engines was negligible, naval officialsnonetheless considered the new radials to be far more reliableand easier to maintain. Following acceptance trials, Curtiss re-ceived an order for 31 Wasp- powered F6C-4s that were deliveredfrom February through June 1927. F4C-4s initially equippedVF-2B embarked on Langley; however, due to newer fightertypes then coming into service (e.g., Boeing F2B-1 in 1927 andF3B-1 in 1928), most were assigned to VN-4D8, the advanced fighter- training unit at NAS Pensacola; and another 15 equippedtwo Marine squadrons, VF-4M at Quantico and VF-10M at SanDiego. Several F6Cs underwent conversions: an F6C-4 becamethe XF6C-5 when modified for test purposes to accept instal-lation of a 525-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690 Hornet engine; theXF6C-6 (see Appendix 2) was an F6C-3 converted into a para-sol monoplane configuration for the 1929 National Air Races;and another F6C-4, re- designated XF6C-7, was briefly used asa testbed for a 250-hp Ranger V-770 air- cooled inline engine.All F6C variants had been replaced in active service units bythe end of 1932.


Curtiss F6C-3


Above: The nine F6C-1s, essentiallyidentical to the Army P-1, were con-vertible to floats, as seen here, butlacked carrier arresting gear. OneF6C-1, after being reworked, becamethe prototype for the radial-enginedF6C-4. Right: First carrier-capableversion F6C-2s were assigned to VF-2and began operating from Langley in1926. Below: One of eight F6C-4s serv-ing with VF-10M at San Diego in thesummer of 1931. The insignia on thetail is a winged devil. All F6C variantswere phased out of active service dur-ing 1932.


Wright F3W—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF3W-1)

Type: One- place landplane and floatplane fighter.Manufacturer: Wright Aeronautical Corp., Dayton, Ohio.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340B Wasp 9-cyliner


Armament: None installed.Performance: Max. speed 162 mph at s.1.; ceiling 33,400 ft.; range

(not reported).Weights: 1,414 lbs. empty, 2,180 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 27 ft. 4 in., length 22 ft. 1 in., wing area 215 sq.

ft.

After developing the NW-1, -2, and F2W-1 in 1922 and1923 for racing (see Appendix 2), BuAer gave Wright a con-tract sometime in 1925 to develop a fighter around the com-pany’s experimental P-1 (R-1300) radial engine as the F3W-1.However, the engine project faltered, so that the aircraft wasultimately completed with a Pratt & Whitney Wasp engineand flown in May 1926. Smaller and lighter than the contem-poraneous Boeing FB and Curtiss F6C, Wright’s F3W-1 (re- designated XF3W-1 in 1927) emerged as a conventional single- bay biplane that utilized a fabric- covered, steel tube fuselageand built- up wooden wings. BuAer never considered the F3W-1 for production but used it instead for various test purposes.At one time it was rigged in a single, centerline float configu-ration to evaluate the concept of basing floatplane fightersaboard battleships, and later still, used to establish altituderecords.

Wright F3W-1

The F3W-1 as deliv-ered to NAS Anacos-tia in 1926. Evalu-ated with centerlinefloat as a battleshipfighter, then usedafterward for experi-mental purposes.

Boeing F2B—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F2B-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 33 (USN)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340B Wasp 9-cylinder


Armament: One .50-cal. and one .30-cal. fixed forward- firing machineguns and 125 lbs. of bombs carried on belly and wing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 158 mph at s.1.; ceiling 21,500 ft.; range 317mi.


Flown for the first time on November 3, 1926, Boeing’smodel 69 appeared as an unsolicited private venture devel-oped in response to BuAer’s new policy of specifying air- cooledradial engines. It represented a fairly straightforward adapta-tion of the FB-5 airframe to a Pratt & Whitney Wasp engine


Boeing F2B-1

with the additional provision for carrying five 25-lb. bombs on racks.

Boeing’s prototype was subsequently acceptedby the Navy as the XF2B-1, the first aircraft testedat NAS Anacostia, Maryland to carry the experi-mental X prefix in its designation. Following trials,BuAer ordered 32 F2B-1s which, in definitiveform, came without a spinner and incorporated thebalanced rudder of the FB-5. Deliveries of produc-tion aircraft began in January 1928, equipping VF-1B (fighter) and VB-2B (bombing) of the SaratogaAir Group. In the fall of 1928, three F2B-1s flownby members of VB-2B formed the “Three SeaHawks,” the Navy’s first aerial demonstration team.The service career of F2Bs was brief, being with-drawn from active units by 1931.

Eberhart FG and F2G—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (FG-1)

Type: One- place Navy carrier/floatplane fighter.Manufacturer: Eberhart Steel Products Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 425-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340C Wasp 9-cylinder


Armament: (none installed).Performance: Max. speed 154 mph at s.1.; ceiling 18,700 ft.; range (not

reported).Weights: 2,145 lbs. empty, 3,208 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 28 ft. 9 in., length 27 ft. 3 in., wing area 241 sq. ft.

This little-known company got its start in aviation license- manufacturing 50 examples of the R.A.F. S.E.5a for the Armyin the early 1920s. The Wasp- powered prototype FG-1, a single- bay biplane having a welded, steeltube fuselage and fabric- covered wings of duraluminum structure, was delivered to theNavy in November 1926. It exhibited an unusual wing layouthaving 7 degrees of sweepback in the upper span and 6 degreesforward sweep in the lower. In 1927, Eberhart fitted the

prototype with a single, centerline float and increased the spanof the upper wing to 32 feet, following which it was evaluatedas a floatplane fighter under the designation F2G-1. Soon af-


One of 15 F2B-1s assigned to Saratoga’s VF-1B “Top Hats” in 1928. Having anairframe very similar to the FB-5, F2B-1s gained fighter-bomber capabilitywith wing racks that carried five 25-lb. bombs.

The aircraft depicted was tested with wheels as the XFG-1 inlate 1927, then with lengthened wings and a center float, as theXF2G-1 in early 1928. Development was abandoned after a crashof the sole prototype.

Eberhart XFG-1


terward, the prototype was destroyed in testing, and further de-velopment was abandoned.

Vought FU—1927 see Vought UO underOBSERVATION AND SCOUT AIRCRAFT

Boeing F3B—1927TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F3B-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 74 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-80 Wasp 9-cylinder


Armament: One .50-cal. and one .30-cal. fixed forward- firing machineguns and 125 lbs. of bombs carried on belly and wing racks.



Delivered to NAS Anacostia in March 1927 as anotherBoeing private venture, the model 74 initially differed littlefrom the F2B-1 other than having the fittings required for a cen-terline float rig. After brief testing by the Navy as the XF3B-1,it was deemed unacceptable and returned to the factory formodifications. When redelivered in early 1928, the revisedXF3B-1 featured an all- new constant- chord upper wing withsweepback, a lengthened fuselage, plus aluminum- skinnedailerons and tail surfaces. Satisfactory trials led to an order for74 production F3B-1s, which were all delivered between Augustand September of 1928. The type initially entered service withVB-2B of Saratoga and went on to equip VF-3B and VB-1Bon the Lexington. All F3Bs had been replaced in active carriersquadrons by the end of 1932, though a few survived as com-mand planes (i.e., flown by senior officers not attached tosquadrons) and utility hacks until 1937. One was alsotransferred to the Marines in 1934 for command and utility du-ties.

Top: An F3B-1 of VF-2B operating from Langley in 1929. Thisaircraft was assigned to the staff of Air Battle Force at the timeof the photograph. Note “Flying Chiefs” emblem below cockpit.Bottom: Seen in a command plane paint scheme during 1936,this F3B-1 assigned to VJ-5D11 served as the personal aircraftof NAS San Diego’s commanding officer.

Boeing F3B-1

Curtiss F7C—1927TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F7C-1)

Type: One- place carrier and landbased fighter.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 18 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340B Wasp 9-cyliner


Armament: Two fixed forward- firing 30-cal. machine guns.Performance: max. speed 151 mph at s.1.; ceiling 23,350 ft.; range 330

mi.Weights: 2,038 lbs. empty, 2,782 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 32 ft. 8 in., length 22 ft. 2 in., wing area 276 sq. ft.

Designed for carrier service by Rex Beisel, who was thenworking for Curtiss, the F7C differed from the F6C-4 mainlyin having new constant- chord wings with sweepback in the


Curtiss F7C-1

upper span. Navy evaluations of the XF7C-1 commenced inFebruary 1927, followed shortly by a contract for 18 productionexamples. As delivered between November 1928 and January1929, production F7C-1s came without spinners and featuredstrengthened landing gear. All F7C-1s were afterward assignedto the Marine Corps, where they served with VF-5M (later VF-9M) at Quantico until 1933.

Curtiss F8C (OC/O2C)Helldiver—1927

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F8C-5)

Type: Two- place carrier and landplane fighter- bomber, ground attack.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 110 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-4 Wasp 9-cylinder

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine guns, one

flexible .30-caliber machine gun in rear cockpit, and up to 474lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 146 mph at s.1.; ceiling 16,050 ft.; combatrange 560 mi.


Another Rex Biesel design, the F8C arose from a 1927Marine Corps requirement for a multi- purpose airplane thatcould fulfill the roles of fighter, dive- bomber, and observationplatform in one airframe. Curtiss responded by adapting its two- seat Army O-2/A-3 Falcon design, normally powered bya water- cooled V-12, to an air- cooled radial engine approvedby BuAer. In early 1928, two aircraft designated XF8C-1s weredelivered to the Marine Corps and four more production F8C-1s soon followed; and a year later, the Marines took deliveryof one very similar XF8C-3 and 21 more F8C-3 productionvariants. In service use, the Marines re- designated F8C-1s asthe OC-1 and F8C-3s as the OC-2. They replaced World WarI–era DH-4B/O2Bs in many Marine units and saw combat serv-ice in Nicaragua with VO-7M.

In early 1929 BuAer authorized the improved XF8C-2 hav-ing new equal- span wings, a strengthened and redesigned fuse-lage, and a balanced rudder. After the flight of the firstprototype in mid–1929, 25 aircraft were ordered as F8C-4s for


The first of 18 F7C-1 production models as seen after delivery inlate 1928. Since they lacked arresting gear, most were assignedto Marine land-based units. The Navy used several for experi-mental purposes.

A Marine OC-2 (F8C-3) serving with VJ-7M out of San Diegoin 1933. The F8C/OC series, an adaptation of the Army A-3,arose from a Marine requirement for a multi-role fighter,bomber, and observation type.

Curtiss F8C-1

the Navy and another 63 as F8C-5s for the Marine Corps. In 1931,two F8C-5s equipped with en-gine superchargers and wingsslots were re- designated XF8C-6, and one F8C-4 airframe, fittedwith an R-1820 engine and anenclosed canopy, was deliveredto the Navy as the XF8C-7, how-ever, neither version was orderedinto production. F8C-4s servedinitially with VF-1B aboardSaratoga but were transferredfrom active status to the reservesbeginning in 1931. Marine F8C-5s were re- designated O2C-1sand remained active with VO-6M and VO-7M until they werereplaced during 1936 –1937; afew remaining examples wereretained for utility duties until1938.

Boeing F4B—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F4B-1 [F4B-4])

Type: One- place carrier and landplane fighterManufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 190 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-8 [550-hp R-1340-

16] Wasp 9-cylinder radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine guns and upto 232 lbs. of

bombs carried on external racks.Performance: Max. speed 176 mph [188 mph] at 6,000 ft.; ceiling

27,700 [26,900] ft.; combat range 371 [370] mi.Weights: 1,950 lbs. [2,354 lbs.] empty, 2,750 lbs. [3,611 lbs.] loaded.Dimensions: Span 30 ft., length 20 ft. 1 in. [20 ft. 5 in.], wing area

227.5 sq. ft.

Boeing F4Bs, produced in four major variants, comprisedmost of the fleet’s fighter force up through the mid–1930s. Itarose as an unsolicited private venture when Boeing deliveredtwo prototypes, company models 83 and 89, to NAS Anacostiain early August 1928, both of which were accepted for trials asthe XF4B-1. The two prototypes differed in landing gear, themodel 83 having a split- axle type and arresting gear, while themodel 89 came with a cross- axle type and fittings to carry a500-lb. bomb under its belly. Though a biplane of conventionaldesign, the compact and highly maneuverable F4B representedthe culmination of Boeing’s experience as a Navy and Armyfighter contractor throughout the 1920s. After satisfactory trials,BuAer purchased both prototypes and awarded Boeing a con-tract to produce 27 F4B-1s.

Production F4B-1s, as they began arriving during thespring of 1929, all featured cross- axle gear, bomb fittings, and


In Marine service, the F8C-5 became the O2C-1. This example, seen at MCAS Quantico in 1935,was assigned to VJ-6M as a hack after having been withdrawn from frontline service.

Curtiss F8C-4

carrier arresting equipment. In this time period,Boeing also sold 90 very similar aircraft to theArmy as the P-12B. F4B-1s were first assigned toVF-2B aboard Langley, replacing F2Bs, and VB-1B (later VF-5B) of Saratoga, replacing its F3Bsand FUs. In later service, most F4B-1s wereretrofitted with ring cowls and F4B-4-type fins andrudders. In June 1930, following development ofthe analogous P-12C for the Army, Boeing receivedan order for 46 F4B-2s having ring cowls, Frise- type ailerons, spit- axle gear, and a tailwheel. De-liveries of -2s began in early 1931, initially equip-ping VF-5B of Lexington and VF-6B of Saratoga.After an unsuccessful venture with the monoplaneXF5B-1 (see below), Boeing adapted the type’s all- metal, semi- monocoque fuselage and reshapedtailplane to the biplane model 218, which it offeredto the Navy in late 1930 as the F4B-3 and to theArmy as the P-12E. In April 1931, following trialsconducted at Anacostia, BuAer placed an order for75 F4B-3s, however, 54 of these were ultimatelydelivered as F4B-4s, and a second contract in 1932added 45 more F4B-4s, totaling 130 aircraft.

The 21 F4B-3s completed began enteringservice in December 1931 with Saratoga’s VF-1Bwhere they replaced Curtiss F8C-4s, then during1933, most were reassigned to Marine squadronVB-4M in San Diego. Except for their larger finsand rudders and uprated R-1340-16 engines, thefirst 54 F4B-4s, delivered from mid–1932, wereotherwise identical to the -3 while the last 45, ar-riving toward the end of the year, came with en-larged headrests. By the middle of 1933, F4B-4swere equipping the fighter squadrons of the AirGroups aboard all three carriers, as well as twoMarine fighter squadrons. The type remained infrontline service with the fleet until 1937, whenthey were replaced by Grumman F3Fs, and con-


Boeing F4B-2

Left: An F4B-2 of VF-6B serving aboard Saratoga in 1931. Note the distinctive “Felix the Cat” squadron emblem. F4B-2s differedfrom -1s in having ring cowls and split-axle landing gear. Right: The F4B-3 was the first version to feature an all-aluminum, semi-monocoque fuselage. Only 21 were delivered before being superceded in production by the F4B-4.

tinued with Marine units until 1938. Upon release from activeservice, a number of F4Bs were retained for utility duties, andin 1940, 23 ex–Army P-12Es were taken into Navy service asF4B-4As and thereafter used as radio- controlled target drones.As of December 1941, some three F4B-3s and 18 F4B-4s werestill carried on the naval inventory.

Hall FH—1929TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFH-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Hall Aluminum Aircraft Co., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-B Wasp 9-cylinder

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Armament: (not installed).Performance: Max. speed 153 mph at s.1.; ceiling 25,300 ft.; range 275

mi.Weights: 2,038 lbs. empty, 2,514bs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 32 ft., length 22 ft. 6 in., wing area 255 sq. ft.

After having received a contract to build the PH-1, an NAF- designed flying boat (see under Patrol Aircraft), Charles Hall’s

new company tried to interest the Navy in an original fighterdesign that utilized Hall’s all- aluminum structural methods.Completed and delivered to Anacostia in June 1929, the XFH-1 featured a semi- monocoque fuselage advertised as being wa-tertight, an unorthodox wing layout reminiscent of the XFG-1(reported above) in which the upper span swept back and thelower forward, plus landing gear that could be jettisoned in theevent of ditching. During testing, however, BuAer rated theXFG-1’s performance as substandard, then in early 1930, afterthe prototype was destroyed in a crash, the program was dis-continued.

Vought F2U—1929

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF2U-1)

Type: Two- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Chance Vought Corp., Long Island City, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340C Wasp 9-cylinder

radial driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine guns, one

flexible .30-caliber machine gun in rear cockpit, and up to 474lbs. of bombs carried externally.


This aircraft was flown by the section leader of VF-2B from Lex-ington in 1934. F4Bs remained in frontline Navy and Marineservice until the end of 1938.

The XFH-1 as delivered to NAS Anacostia in June 1929 for trials.It was unique in having a watertight fuselage for flotation in theevent of ditching, but it did not compare favorably with the con-temporaneous F4B-1.

Hall Aluminum XFH-1



Ordered under a BuAer contract issued in 1928, the XF2U-1 represented an attempt by Vought to offer the Navy a designthat would be competitive against the Curtiss F8C-4/-5 two- seat fighter /dive- bomber. Like Curtiss during this period,Vought was a major Navy contractor, having delivered over 400aircraft (huge volume in those days) since 1918. Sharing manyaerodynamic and structural characteristics with Vought’s suc-cessful O2U series (see Observation and Scout Aircraft), theXF2U-1 prototype emerged with an NACA- type cowling andslightly larger overall dimensions than the rival F8C. The pro-totype was delivered to the Navy for trials in June 1929,

however, BuAer afterward declined productionon the basis that the type’s performance offeredno advantage over existing F8Cs.

Berliner- Joyce FJ—1930

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFJ-2)

Type: One- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Berliner- Joyce Co., Baltimore, Mary-

land.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 500-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-

C Wasp 9-cylinder radial driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Armament: (none installed).Performance: Max. speed 193 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceil-

ing 24,700 ft.; range 520 mi.Weights: 2,102 lbs. empty, 3,116 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 28 ft., length 20 ft. 10 in., wing

area 179 sq. ft.

Appearing as the first of three aircraft builtto BuAer’s “small carrier fighter” requirement(see also, Curtiss F9C and General AviationFA), Berliner- Joyce received a contract in May1929 to construct a single prototype as the XFJ-1. The design called for by the specificationswas unusual: a biplane having a metal- skinned, semi- monocoque fuselage and metal tail groupwith shoulder- mounted upper wings and alower wing underslung on cabane- type struts.The prototype arrived at NAS Anacostia fortesting in May 1930, but after incurring damageto the lower wing and landing gear, was re-turned to the factory for repairs and modifica-tions. When redelivered in May 1932 as the


Intended to compete with the Curtiss F8C, theXF2U-1 emerged in 1929 with an innovativeNACA cowling. Aerodynamic characteristicswere similar to Vought’s successful series of O2Ufloat and observation planes.

Vought XF2U-1

XFJ-2, the aircraft had been revised to include enlarged verticaltail surfaces, a ring cowl, spinner, and large wheel pants. Sub-sequent flight- testing, though indicating a 15 mph increase intop speed, revealed poor stability and unacceptable handling

qualities. BuAer purchased the prototype but by this time haddecided to order the competing F9C as a dirigible fighter, withthe result that further development of the XFJ-2 was discon-tinued.

Boeing F5B—1930TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF5B-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 500-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340D Wasp 9-cylinder

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropeller.

Armament: (none installed).Performance: Max. speed 183 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling 27,100 ft.; range

(not reported).Weights: 2,091 lbs. empty, 2,848 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 30 ft. 6 in., length 21 ft., wing area 157 sq. ft.

The F5B was the first monoplane fighter design to be eval-uated by the Navy since the Dornier- Wright WP-1 of 1923 (seeAppendix 1). In early 1930, as an unsolicited private venture,


One of three prototypes built to a 1929 “small carrier fighter”requirement. Following an engine change plus addition of a ringcowl and wheel pants, the XFJ-1 returned to NAS Anacostia in1932 as the XFJ-2.

Berliner Joyce XFJ-1

Boeing XF5B-1

Boeing offered to deliver its model 205 for testing, and some-time after the prototype arrived at NAS Anacostia, BuAer pur-chased it under the designation XF5B-1. Though similar insome respects to Boeing’s highly successful F4B series, theXF5B-1 introduced a new type of metal- skinned, semi- monocoque fuselage and a parasol- mounted wing of about fiftypercent greater area than a standard F4B upper wing. Followingtrials, naval officials rated the type as unsatisfactory, presumablydue to its higher landing speeds (i.e., 12 mph higher than theF4B-1). Instead, BuAer gave Boeing contract to produce theF4B-3, a biplane derivative that incorporated similar structuralimprovements. The Army also evaluated the type as the XP-15, but, again, no production was forthcoming.

Curtiss F9C Sparrowhawk—1931

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F9C-2)

Type: One- place dirigible/carrier fighterManufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Garden City, New

York.Total produced: 8 (USN)Powerplant: One 438-hp Wright R-975-E3 9-cylinder radial driving

a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing 30-cal. machine guns.Performance: Max. speed 177 mph at 4,000 ft.; ceiling 19,200 ft.; com-

bat range 366 mi.Weights: 2,089 lbs. empty, 2,770 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 25 ft. 5 in., length 20 ft. 7 in., wing area 173 sq. ft.

Though originally designed to fulfill BuAer’s “smallcarrier fighter” requirement, the Curtiss F9C went on to achievedistinction as the only type of naval aircraft ever intended forcombat operations from a rigid airship. Ordered in June 1930and making its first flight on February 12, 1931, the XF9C-1 wasthe last Curtiss aircraft to be completed at its Garden City fa-cility. As required in the specifications, the XF9C-1 emergedwith a metal- skinned fuselage, metal tailplane, and upper wingsmounted directly to the top of the fuselage. While undergoing

acceptance trials at NAS Anacostia during the spring of 1931,BuAer determined that the XF9C-1’s small size would permitto fit through the bottom- mounted hangar doors of the two largerigid airships, ZRS-4 Akron and ZRS-5 Macon, then under con-struction by Goodyear. “Dirigible fighters,” as they weretermed, were seen as a means of defending the airship fromoutside fighter attack and also forming a scouting screen aheadof it.

An apparatus for launching and recovering aircraft aboardairships was successfully tested when the XF9C-1 made its first hook- on with the ZR-3 Los Angeles on October 27, 1931. Thesystem consisted of a “trapeze,” a half ring suspended from aderrick lowered by the airship, which, in turn, was engaged bya “skyhook” mounted on struts above the aircraft’s upper wing.As a result of design changes recommended by BuAer, theXF9C-2, delivered in April 1932, featured a slightly more pow-


This was the first type of monoplane fighter to be evaluated bythe Navy in 1930. Though rated as unsatisfactory, its aluminum-clad fuselage structure was incorporated into the F4B-3 and -4.

Curtiss F9C-2

erful engine, upper wings raised four inches, wheel pants, andlarger, reshaped vertical tail surfaces, and following brief trials,Curtiss received a contract to manufacture six production ex-amples. On June 29, 1932, soon after the first F9C-2 enteredservice, the first hook- on was made with the airship Akron.When the final example was delivered the following September,all six F9Cs were attached to Akron. Fortunately, none wereaboard when the airship was lost at sea in April 1933, and theywere reassigned to the Macon upon its commissioning in June1933. Once airship operations were underway, the Spar-rowhawks, to increase speed, often flew from the airship withtheir landing gear removed, depending solely on skyhooks forlaunch and recovery. But when the Macon was itself destroyedoff the California coast in February 1935, four of the F9C-2sperished with it. The three remaining Sparrowhawks operatedbriefly as utility aircraft but had been withdrawn by 1936.

Grumman FF/SF—1931

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (FF-1)

Type: Two- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp., Bethpage, New

York.Total produced: 63 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Wright R-1820-78 9-cylinder radial driving

a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, two flexible

.30-cal. machine guns in rear cockpit, and up four 112-lb. bombson wing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 207 mph at 4,000 ft.; ceiling 22,000 ft.;combat range 685 mi.


The FF/SF was not just the Navy’s first retractable- gearcombat aircraft but was the airplane that literally got the brandnew Grumman company off the ground. Soon after LeroyGrumman started an aeronautical engineering business in 1929,he obtained a Navy contract to build a new type of seaplanefloat that incorporated retractable landing wheels for land op-

erations. From this beginning, the company received a contractin April 1931 to build an airplane of its own design—a two- seat- fighter designated the XFF-1—that utilized the landinggear retraction system developed for pontoons. The landinggear was manually raised and lowered by operating a hand- crank linked to a pair of long jackscrews. The XFF-1 was thefirst naval fighter designed around the new Wright R-1820 Cy-clone engine and included other innovations such as an all- metal fuselage and fully enclosed canopies for the pilot andgunner/observer.

After the XFF-1 made its first flight in December 1931, test-ing revealed that it was faster than any single- seat Navy fighterof the day (i.e., a top speed of 195 mph versus 186 mph for theF4B-2). A second prototype, differing mainly in equipmentcarried, was completed as the XSF-1. In December 1932 theNavy ordered 27 production examples of the FF-1 fighter and33 more as SF-1 scouts. Installation of R-1820-78 and -84 en-gines boosted top speed to over 200 mph. As deliveries com-menced in 1934, FF-1s were assigned to VF-5B and SF-1s toVS-3B, both serving in Lexington’s Air Group. FF-1s and SF-1s were phasedout of active service during 1936 and transferredto the reserves, where they continued to operate until 1940. In


F9C-2s, equipped with “skyhooks” as seen here, formed theheavier-than-air fighter and scouting force aboard the large rigidairships Akron and Macon from 1933 to 1935.

Grumman FF-1

1934 Canadian Car & Foundry obtained a license from Grum-man to build FF-1s as the G-23, and 57 examples were manu-factured between 1935 and 1937, fifteen of them going to theRCAF, one each to Nicaragua and Japan, and forty to the Span-ish Republican forces.

General Aviation FA—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFA-1)

Type: One- place dirigible/carrier fighterManufacturer: General Aviation Mfg. Corp., Hasbrouk Heights, New

Jersey.Total produced: 1 (USN)Power plant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340C Wasp 9-cylinder

radial driving a three or two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns.


Top: The FF-1 and the nearly identical SF-1 were the first retractable-gear combat aircraft evaluated by the Navy. Both types wereassigned only to Lexington’s Air Group, FF-1s to VF-5B and SF-1s to VS-3B. Bottom: One of the 18 SF-1s that served with VS-3Baboard Lexington during 1935. VS-3B were reequipped with SBU-1s in 1936.



The FA appeared during early 1932 as the last of three air-craft designed to BuAer’s “small carrier fighter” requirement.General Aviation, before being acquired by General Motors in1929, had been the Atlantic Aircraft Division of Fokker AircraftCorp. of America. Similar in many respects to the F9C, theXFA-1 featured an all- metal fuselage and gull- mounted upperwings but could be distinguished by large landing gear fairingsthat were strut- braced to the wings. The prototype was deliveredto NAS Anacostia on March 5, 1932 with a three- bladed pro-peller installed which was later exchanged for a two- bladedtype. As BuAer had already made the decision to procure theF9C-2 for the small numbers of dirigible fighters needed, de-velopment of the XFA-1 was short- lived and no production or-ders resulted.

Curtiss F10C—1932 see Curtiss S3C underOBSERVATION AND SCOUT AIRCRAFT

Curtiss F11C (BFC, BF2C)Goshawk—1932

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F11C-2 [BF2C-1])

Type: One- place carrier fighter /bomber- fighterManufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Div., Buffalo,

New York.Total produced: 56 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Wright R-1820-78 [R-1820-04] Cyclone 9-

cylinder radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine guns and upto 474 lbs. of bombs carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 205 mph [228 mph] at 8,000 ft.; ceiling24,300 [27,000] ft.; combat range 560 [797] mi.

Weights: 3,037 lbs. [3,329 lbs.] empty, 4,638 lbs. [5,086 lbs.] loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft. 6 in., length 25 ft. [23 ft.], wing area 262 sq.

ft.

Curtiss, after being reorganized as Curtiss- Wright Corp.in 1929, continued to be a major supplier of naval aircraftthrough the 1930s. In April 1932, BuAer ordered two biplanefighter prototypes from Curtiss based upon the company’sHawk II model, a radial engine design incorporating the aero-dynamic and structural improvements of the Army’s P-6E. TheXF11C-1 was to be powered by a twin- row R-1510 and theXF11C-2 (actually the company’s existing Hawk II demon -strator) by a single- row R-1820. Both aircraft were to possesslight dive- bombing capability, configured to carry either a 474-lb. bomb on the centerline or four 112-lb. bombs under thewings. The XF11C-2 was delivered for trials in June 1932 andthe F11C-1 a year later. Curtiss received an order in October1932 for 28 F11C-2s and deliveries began the followingFebruary. In 1934 these aircraft were re- designated BFC-2s andlater retrofitted with half sliding canopies mounted to a raisedrear turtledeck that housed a life raft. The fifth production F11C-2 was reworked to accept a Grumman- type, inward- retractinglanding gear assembly and re- designated F11C-3, and the Navy


General Aviation XFA-1

XFA-1, seen here at NAS in early 1932, at Anacostia, was the lastof three aircraft evaluated under the “small carrier fighter”specification. It was similar in layout to the Curtiss F9C.

ordered 27 examples in February 1934 as the BF2C-1. Deliveriesof production BF2C-1s, which also featured the BFC-2 retrofits,commenced in late 1934.

All F11C-2s/BFC-2s served with VF-1B (later renamedVB-2B, and later still, VB-3B) aboard Saratoga from early 1933until the type was withdrawn from active service in early 1938. Retractable- gear BF2C-1s, starting in late 1934, were assignedto VB-5B of the Air Group formed for the newly commissioned


Left, bottom: The F11C was essentially a radial engine, a naval-ized variant of the Army P-6E. All F11C-2s became BFC-2s in1934. The photograph depicts a BFC-2 serving with VB-2B aboardLex ington in 1934. Above: The retractable-gear F11C-3 prototypewas placed in production as the BF2C-1. All served with VB-5Bof the Ranger Air Group from late 1935 until unexpectedly with-drawn in 1937 due to structural problems in the wings.

Ranger, but after less than three years in the fleet, had to bewithdrawn from service due to a serious flutter problem at-tributed to the metal structure of the upper wing, which, inone reported case, had resulted in a complete wingseparation during a dive- bombing run. These were the last Curtiss- built fighters in regular Navy service.

Berliner- Joyce F2J—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF2J-1)

Type: Two- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Berliner- Joyce Aircraft Corp., Baltimore, Mary-

land.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 625-hp Wright R-1510-92 14-cylinder radial

driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitch propel-ler.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, oneflexible .30-cal. rear machine gun, and up to 500 lbs. of bombscarried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 193 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling 21,500 ft.;combat range 522 mi.


A product of the relatively short- lived Berliner- JoyceAircraft Corporation (1929–1935), the F2J was built to fulfillthe same multi- role biplane fighter requirement as the con-temporaneous FD and F3U (see below, and Vought SBU,above), but, unlike them, was not tied to a specific BuAerdesign pattern. Following the unsuccessful effort with its single- seat XFJ-1 and -2, Berliner- Joyce received a contractin June 1931 to construct a two- seat fighter prototype underthe designation XF2J-1. Much of its general design conceptwas borrowed from the company’s two- seat Army Y1P-16fighter, whose chief characteristic was upper wings thatgulled into the fuselage instead of being supported by con-ventional cabane struts. Like the rival FD and F3U, theXF2J-1 featured fixed landing gear, a metal- clad fuselage,and fabric- covered wings.Sometime after delivery, a fullyenclosed cockpit canopy wasalso installed. Completion ofthe prototype extended over a twoyear period, however, anddelivery to Anacostia did notoccur until mid–1933. Testingof the prototype subsequentlyrevealed poor visibility (pre-sumably due to the wing con -figuration) and sub- standardperformance compared to other


Berliner Joyce XF2J-1

The short-lived XF2J-1 while atAnacostia for trials during 1933.The two-seat scout and fighterconcepts ultimately merged intothe new scout-bomber require-ment in 1934.

new scout and fighter types, thus no further developmentwas undertaken.

Douglas FD—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFD-1)

Type: Two- place carrier fighterManufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, California.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-64 14-cylinder

radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard fixed- pitchpropeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun, oneflexible .30-cal.rear machine gun, and up to 500 lbs. ofbombs carried externally.


Weights: 3,227 lbs. empty, 5,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft. 6 in., length 25 ft. 4 in., wing area 295

sq. ft.

The FD was a continuation of the two- seat fighter con-cept that had originated with the F8C series, in which thefunctions of fighter, scout, and dive- bomber were combinedin one airframe. A 1932 requirement listed as BuAer Design113 called for a conventional two- seat biplane layout, fixedlanding gear, 500-lb. bomb load, and an R-1535 powerplant.In June 1932, contracts for construction of single prototypesunder this requirement were given to Douglas as the XFD-1 and Vought as the XF3U-1. When both prototypes arrivedfor testing at NAS Anacostia in June 1933 (within four daysof each other), the chief differences between them was aspreader bar between the main gear struts on the XFD-1and minor aerodynamic details. Ironically, by the time theXFD-1 had been delivered, the Navy had already movedaway from the two- seat fighter idea in favor of scout- bomber (SB) types, which it planned to operate in conjunc-tion with single- seat fighters. As a consequence, no furtherdevelopment of the XFD-1 was undertaken after 1933.


The sole XFD-1 run-ning up at Anacostia in1933. Ordered alongwith the Vought XF3U-1, the Navy was alreadymoving away from thetwo-seat fighter conceptby the time this proto-type arrived for testing.

Douglas XFD-1

Vought F3U—1933 see Vought SBU underATTACK AIRCRAFT

Curtiss F12C—1933 see Curtiss SBC underATTACK AIRCRAFT

Boeing F6B (BFB)—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XBFB-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter /bomber- fighter.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 625-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-44 14-cylinder

radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitchpropeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine gunsand up to 474 lbs. of bombs carried externally.



sq. ft.

The F6B/BFB was the second installment of theNavy’s short- lived, single-seat bomber- fighter concept. In1931, while Boeing was making preparations tomanufacture the F4B-3 and F4B-4 in quantity, BuAer in-dicated interest in a related design that would possess im-proved light dive- bombing capability, and thus in June of1931, authorized the company to construct a singleprototype as the XF6B-1. But as a consequence of Boeing’sconcurrent involvement in other military projects (i.e.,F4B-3 and -4, P-12E, B-9, and P-26) completion and de-livery of the XF6B-1 to NAS Anacostia was delayed untilFebruary 1933, by which time Curtiss had already flowntwo prototypes (i.e., F11C-1 and -2) built to the same re-quirements. After commencing flight trials, the prototypereceived the new bomber- fighter designation XBFB-1.While having many aerodynamic and structural character-istics in common with the F4B-3 and -4, theXBFB-1 came with ten percent more wingarea, more horsepower, and fully cantileveredmain gear legs allowing clearance for ord-nance on the centerline. The aircraft was re-tained for testing but no production was or-dered. It was the last type of biplane to bebuilt by Boeing at Seattle.


The sole XBFB-1 (XF6B-1) evaluated at Ana-costia during 1933. Similarity to Boeing’s suc-cessful F4B series is evident. By the time theXBFB-1 arrived, the Navy had decided to pur-chase the Curtiss BFC-2 (F11C-2).

Boeing XBFB-1

Grumman F2F—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F2F-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp., Bethpage, New

York.Total produced: 55 (USN)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1535-44 14-cylin-

der radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machineguns.

Performance: Max. speed 231 mph at 7,500 ft.; ceiling 27,100ft.; range 985 mi. max.


230 sq. ft.

In the wake of Grumman’s success with the FF-1in 1931, BuAer awarded the company a contract in No-vember 1932 to design and construct a prototype for theNavy’s most recent single- seat fighter competition (i.e.,one of two retractable- gear biplanes considered alongwith the Curtiss XF11C-3/BF2C-1, reported above).When flown for the first time on October 18, 1933, theXF2F-1 epitomized the stubby, “beer- barrel” appearanceassociated with all Grumman biplane fighters. Usingmany of the structural and aerodynamic features seenon the FF-1, the XF2F-1 introduced improved stream-lining with a very tightly cowled engine having bumpsfor cylinder- head clearance. During acceptance trials,the prototype showed itself to be highly maneuverableand fast, posting a top speed of 229 mph and a rate- of- climb exceeding 3,000 feet- per- minute. On the negativeside, flying the XF2F-1 proved to be tricky, with a pre-disposition to spin, but the trait was not judged seriousenough to require aerodynamic changes.

In May 1934, Grumman received a contract to pro-duce 54 aircraft as the F2F-1,and deliveries to the fleet com-menced in early 1935. By mid- year, the type was equippingVF-2B on Lexington and VF-3B aboard the Ranger. WhenVF-3B was changed to VF-7Bon the new Yorktown, thenlater, to VF-5 on the evennewer Wasp, the F2Fs wentwith the unit. All F2F-1s hadbeen replaced by F3Fs in car-rier squadrons before the endof 1940 but remained in serv-ice as gunnery and fightertrainers. As of December 1941,16 F2F-1s were still flying atNAS Miami and another sevenat NAS Pensacola.


A brand-new F2F-1 in front of Grumman’s factory in mid–1934, just before delivery. The aircraftis depicted in the markings of Lexington’s VF-2B, the first squadron to become operational withthe type.

Grumman F2F-1

Boeing F7B—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF7B-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-30 Wasp

9-cylinder radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Stan-dard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machineguns.

Performance: Max. speed 239 mph at 10,000 ft.; ceiling26,900 ft.; range 824 mi. max.


213 sq. ft.

The first of three monoplane fighter prototypesto be tested at NAS Anacostia during the early andmid–1930s, the F7B represented an ultimately unsuc-cessful effort by Boeing to maintain its place as amajor supplier of Navy fighters. Though sharing thesame powerplant and some design characteristics withthe Army’s monoplane P-26, the XF7B-1 differed inhaving 30 percent more wing area, an enclosedcanopy, and per requirements, landing gear that re-tracted rearward into the wings. The prototype madeits first flight on September 14, 1933, and was deliveredfor military trials two months later. Despite having atop speed 10 mph higher (239 mph) than the rival bi-planes (i.e., XF11C-3 and XF2F-1), the XF7B-1suffered from excessive takeoff runs, high landingspeeds, and general instability to the extent that theNavy returned it to the factory for modifications inthe spring of 1934. When the prototype arrived backat Anacostia for testing in early 1935 without thecanopy and flaps installed on the wings, landing speedwas 12 mph lower, however, the added weight of theimprovements effectively cancelled any speed advan-tage over the biplanes. Soon afterward, the plane wasrendered non- flyable afterbeing overstressed in dive testsand the project was cancelled.


The F7B-1, seen here at Ana-costia in 1934, was one of threemonoplane fighter prototypesbeing tested by the Navy. It wasultimately rejected in favor ofimproved biplanes (e.g., Cur-tiss BF2C-1 and GrummanF2F-1).

Boeing XF7B-1

Berliner- JoyceF3J—1934

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF3J-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter /bomber- fighter.Manufacturer: Berliner- Joyce Co., Baltimore,

Maryland.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 625-hp Wright R-1510-26 14-

cylinder radial driving a two- bladed Hamil-ton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-calibermachine guns and up to 474 lbs. of bombscarried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 209 mph at 6,000 ft.;ceiling 24,500 ft.; range 719 mi. max.

Weights: 2,717 lbs. empty, 4,016 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 29 ft., length 22 ft. 11 in.,


The last type of fixed- gear biplane fighter to be consideredby the Navy and the final product of Berliner- Joyce before thatcompany ceased operations, the F3J was one of three aircraftordered to evaluate the Navy’s short- lived bomber- fighter con-cept (see also Curtiss F11C and Boeing F6B, above). BuAer au-thorized construction of an XF3J-1 prototype in June 1932, butdelivery was not forthcoming until April 1934, by which timethe competing F11C-2/BFC-2 had already entered service andthe retractable- gear BF2C-1 had been ordered into production.After remaining at Anacostia for a year, the XF3J-1 was strickenfrom the Navy inventory.

Curtiss F13C—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF13C-3)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Div., Buffalo,

New York.Total produced: 1 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 700-hp Wright R-1510-12 14-cylinder radial driving

a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machine guns.Performance: Max. speed 232 mph at 7,000 ft.; ceiling 24,100 ft.;

range 726 mi. max.Weights: 3,499 lbs. empty, 4,721 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 35 ft., length 26 ft. 3 in., wing area 205 sq. ft.

Perhaps the most interesting contender in the Navy’s mid–1930s fighter competition, the Curtiss F13C offered a two- for- one approach in which the aircraft could be rigged as either amonoplane or a biplane. The monoplane version included abroader chord high wing that utilized a combination of flapsand retractable leading- edge slats to bring takeoff and landingspeeds within acceptable limits (i.e., 65 to 70 mph). First flownin monoplane configuration on January 7, 1934, then delivered


Berliner Joyce XF3J-1

The XF3J-1, pictured here in 1934, was the last of three “bomber-fighter” prototypes to be tested at Anacostia. Although the Cur-tiss BFC and BF2C had achieved limited production, the BFconcept was on its way out.

to Anacostia a month later, the XF13C-1 subsequentlyposted a top speed of 236 mph and exhibitedgenerally good flying characteristics but was ham-pered by poor visibility, faulty slat operations, andproblems with the experimental twin- row R-1510 en-gine.

When flown as the XF13C-2 in a biplane rig, theplane’s performance did not compare favorablyagainst competing biplanes such as the F2F-1 andBF2C-1. The prototype was returned to Curtiss for areshaped fin a rudder to permit easier carrier stowage,and as the XF13C-3, rigged again as a monoplane, itarrived back at Anacostia in the spring of 1935 to re-sume testing. In the interval, BuAer had decidedagainst production, and the prototype was transferredto N.A.C.A. where it was used as a flying testbedbriefly during 1937; after leaving N.A.C.A., theXF13C-3 served as a Marine command plane atQuantico until late 1938.

Northrop FT—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFT-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Northrop Corp., El Segundo, California.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 625-hp Wright R-1510-26 14-cylinder

radial driving a two- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-caliber machineguns and 232 lbs. of bombs carried on external racks.

Performance: Max. speed 235 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling26,500 ft.; range 976 mi. max.


sq. ft.

Coming as Northrop’s first endeavor to obtain aNavy contract, the FT appeared as the only fixed- gearparticipant in the Navy’s first monoplane fighter com-


Left: The XF13C-1 in original monoplane configuration as delivered to Anacostia in February 1934. Testing revealed faulty leading-edge slats, engine problems, and restricted pilot visibility. Right: The same aircraft, rigged as a biplane, after arriving back at Ana -costia in the spring of 1935. In this configuration, its performance did not compare favorably with the F2F or BF2C.

Curtiss XF13C-1

petition. As delivered to NAS Anacostia for trials inMarch 1934, the XFT-1 was powered by an ex peri -mental twin- row R-1510 engine and bore a strong aero-dynamic resemblance to Northrop’s successful Gammaseries. The 235 mph top speed attained in flight- testingwas slightly better than the biplanes but engine prob-lems, coupled with dangerous spin characteristics,caused the prototype to be returned to the factory formodifications. Northrop thereafter exchanged the en-gine for a more reliable Pratt & Whitney R-1535, in-stalling a longer- chord cowling, but other than smallrevisions to the wheel covers, the airframe was left un-changed. After the aircraft was returned to Anacostiain April 1936 as the XFT-2, its spin characteristics werestill unacceptable and the aircraft was grounded. Soonafterward, when a Northrop test pilot attempted anunauthorized flight back to the factory, the prototypecrashed en route, and the program was terminated.

Grumman F3F—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F3F-2)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp., Bethpage,New York.Total produced: 163 (all versions)Powerplant: One 950-hp Wright R-1820-22 Cyclone 9-cylin-der radial driving a three- bladed Hamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.Armament: One .50-cal. and one .30-cal. fixed forward- firingmachine gun and 232 lbs. of bombs carried on external racks.Performance: Max. speed 260 mph at 17,250 ft.; ceiling32,300 ft.; range 1,030 mi. max.Weights: 3,254 lbs. empty, 4,750 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 32 ft., length 23 ft. 2 in., wing area 260sq. ft.

In late 1934, in order to correct the shortcomingsof the F2F-1, BuAer authorized Grumman to proceed

with an XF3F-1 prototypeincorporating a one footnine inch extension to thefuselage and adding threeand half feet to wingspanwhile retaining the F2F’sR-1535 powerplant andother structural features.Right after the proto -type’s first flight on


Northrop XFT-1

One of several monoplanefighters being evaluated,the XFT-1 with WrightR-1510 engine is shown atNAS Anacostia in thespring of 1934. Flight test-ing indicated dangerousspin characteristics.

March 20, 1935, it failed to recover from a terminal dive,killing Grumman test pilot Jimmy Collins; then onlytwo months later, the second XF3F-1 was lost when thepilot was forced to bail out during an uncontrolled spin.Despite the inauspicious start, the third XF3F-1 was de-livered to NAS Anacostia for military testing the fol-lowing June and performed well enough during accept-ance trials that, in August 1935, Grumman received acontract to manufacture 54 production examples as theF3F-1. Deliveries began in March 1936, and by the endof the year, the type had reequipped VF-5B aboardRanger and VF-6B on Saratoga. After being releasedfrom frontline squadrons in 1940, F3F-1s served asfighters trainers at NAS Norfolk and NAS Miami, 39still remaining active as of December 1941.

The last biplane fighters produced for the Navy,the F3F-2 and -3, were the outcome of a desire on thepart of BuAer to achieve better all- around performancefrom an already proven airframe. Ordered from Grum-man in July 1936, the XF3F-2 was redesigned for in-stallation of a 950-hp Wright R-1820, receiving in theprocess a larger diameter, shorter- chord cowling alongwith a three- bladed propeller. Internal fuel wasincreased to 130 gallons, extending range by 10 percent.When tested at Anacostia during January 1937, the pro-totype reached a maximum speed of 260 mph andshowed a 30 percent increase in rate- of- climb (2,800 feet- per- minute). As a result of trials, the canopy wasrevised and the rudder enlarged to offset increasedtorque. BuAer placed an order for 81 F3F-2s in March1937, followed a year later by a contract for 27 F3F-3s,identical except for water- injection systems added tothe engine (which were later removed). Deliveries tothe fleet began in late 1937, initially to VF-6 of the newlycommissioned Enterprise, then later to VF-5 on York-town. As production continued, F3F-2s and -3s went onto equip two more Navy and two Marine squadrons.


Left: A VF-3 F3F-1 from the Saratoga Air Group in 1938. The unit operated F3F-1s and F2A-1s side-by-side from mid–1939 untilmid–1941, when both were replaced by F4F-3s. Right: One of 17 F3F-2s that began equipping San Diego–based VMF-2 (later VMF-211) in 1938. A small number of these aircraft remained active with VMF-111 and -211 right up to the end of 1941.

Grumman F3F-2

They remained in frontline service until replaced bymono planes (i.e., Grumman F4Fs and Brewster F2As)during the middle of 1941, and by December, a smallnumber were still active in Marine squadrons (VMF-111and -211) while 77 had been transferred to shore basesfor fighter training.

Curtiss H75B (Y1P-36)—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (H75B)

Type: One- place landplane fighter.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Div.,

Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 850-hp Wright R-1820-39 Cyclone 9-

cylinder radial driving a three- bladed Curtiss Electric variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: (none installed).Performance: Max. speed 280 mph at 10,000 ft.; ceiling 32,500

ft.; range 730 mi. max.Weights: 4,049 lbs. empty, 5,075 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 37 ft. 4 in., length 28 ft. 1 in., wing area

236 sq. ft.

In mid–1936, after disappointing trials with theBoeing F7B, Curtiss F13C, and Northrop FT monoplanefighters, BuAer asked Curtiss to fly its H75B to NASAnacostia to be considered as a potential naval variant.The H75B, a company- owned demonstrator carriedunder civil registration NX17Y, had already been testedat Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio, and was being devel-oped for the Army Air Corps as the service test Y1P-36. Little is known about the Navy trials following de-livery of the aircraft other than the fact that BuAerultimately determined that the H75B was unsuited forcarrier operations. Evaluating officials probably con-cluded that with the extra weight of carrier arrestinggear and armament, the H75B would offer little or noperformance advantage over the proven F3F.

Seversky NF-1 (SEV-1XP)—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NF-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Seversky Aircraft Corp., Farming-

dale, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 950-hp Wright R-1820-22 Cy-

clone 9-cylinder radial driving a three- bladedHamilton Standard variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing 30-cal. ma-chine guns.


Curtiss 75B

Left: The Curtiss H75B (Y1P-36) companydemonstrator flown to Anacostia for evalua-tions in mid–1936. With the extra weight ofarresting gear and armament, the plane wasseen as offering little advantage over theF3F-2.

Performance: Max. speed 267mph at 15,000 ft.; ceiling30,700 ft.; range 1,100 mi.(est.).


Dimensions: Span 36 ft., length25 ft. 2 in., wing area 220 sq.ft.

In September 1937, a yearafter the Navy had rejected theCurtiss H75B as a monoplanefighter candidate, Seversky’s NF-1 (Naval FighterOne) prototype reached NAS Ana costia for officialacceptance trials. Unlike the H75B, the NF-1 carriedarmament and was equipped with carrier arrestinggear. Seversky had also enlarged the windshield topermit better over- the- nose visibility during carrierapproaches. The reason why BuAer specified a Cyclone- powered variant instead of the R-1830 TwinWasp powerplant that equipped the Army’s P-35 pro-duction model is not made clear. In any case, testingof the NF-1 subsequently revealed it to be only mar-ginally faster than the F3F-2 and possess a similar rate- of- climb. Though never receiving an officialnaval designation, the NF-1 reportedly stayed at Ana-costia for several more years where it was evaluatedagainst new fighter designs such as the Brewster F2Aand Grumman F4F.

Brewster F2A Buffalo—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F2A-2)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Brewster Aeronautical Corp., Long Island

City, New York.Total produced: 163 (USN/USMC)Powerplant: One 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-42 Cyclone 9-

cylinder radial driving a three- bladed Curtiss Electric variable- pitch propeller.

Armament: Four fixed forward- firing 50-cal. machine guns,two in the nose and one in each wings.

Performance: Max. speed 323 mph at 16,500 ft.; ceiling34,000 ft.; range 1,105 mi. combat, 1,670 mi. max.


sq. ft.

The Brewster F2A, although much criticized,still deserves recognition as the first type of mono-plane fighter to enter service aboard Navy carriers.Toward the end of 1935, after having rejected all of


Seversky NF-1

Right: Essentially a navalizedversion of the Army P-35, theNF-1 was deemed as not show-ing much improvement in per-formance over the F3F-2 whentested at NAS Anacostia in late1937.

the monoplane fighters previously tested (i.e., Boeing F7B,Curtiss F13C, and Northrop FT), BuAer asked Brewster, a new-comer to the military aviation scene, and Grumman to bothconceive new fighter designs that would eventually replaceF2Fs and F3Fs. At this point in its history, Brewster had per-formed some sub- contract work for Grumman and Vought but

was still in the process of building its first airplane—the XSBA-1—for the Navy’s current scout- bomber competition. In re-sponse to BuAer’s latest request, the company design team, ledby chief engineer Dayton Brown, came forward with the model139, a mid- wing monoplane concept resembling a scaled- downversion of the company’s XSBA-1 prototype (see above), and


Brewster F2A-2

soon afterward, in June 1936, Brew-ster received a contract for con-struction of a single prototype asthe XF2A-1, with completion ex-pected before the end of 1937. Orig-inally, the aircraft was to have beenpowered by the smaller- diameterPratt & Whitney R-1535 twin- rowengine, however, before the finaldesign had been fixed, BuAerchanged the specification to the950-hp Wright XR-1820-22 (thesame powerplant specified for theXF3F-2). As a consequence, thefinal design of the XF2A-1 emergedwith the very rotund fuselageprofile that would become theplane’s most distinctive feature, andas events would later prove, limitthe design’s development potential.Other design characteristics in com-mon with the XSBA-1 included el-liptical tail surfaces and a leveredgear system that retracted thewheels into the belly of the fuse-lage.

The XF2A-1 prototype wasrolled out for its first flight some-time in December 1937 and deliv-ered to NAS Anacostia in early1938 to participate in a fly- offagainst Grumman’s XF4F-2. Astesting of the two aircraft pro-ceeded, the XF4F-2 proved to be 10mph faster, but in comparison, theXF2A-1 exhibited superior handingqualities and performed better incarrier deck landing trials. In mid–


Top, right: The first monoplanefighter to enter fleet service, F2A-1sbegan replacing VF-3’s F3F-1saboard Saratoga in mid–1939. Only11 F2A-1s were accepted in anticipa-tion of the improved F2A-2. Middle:The XF2A-2 as delivered to Anacos-tia in July 1939. Its nose had beenshortened eight inches to compen-sate for added engine weight. Theplane ultimately reached servicewith VF-2 on Lexington and VF-3on Saratoga. Bottom: A factory-newF2A-3 in 1941, painted in overalllight gray. By the end of the year,F4Fs had replaced F2As in all com-bat units except for VF-2, VS-201,and VMF-221. Some were delivereddirectly to training centers.

June 1938, after a forced landing caused Grumman’s prototypeto be returned to the factory for repairs, BuAer declared Brew-ster interim winner of the competition and awarded thecompany a contract to produce 54 aircraft as the F2A-1.Delivery of the first 11 F2A-1 production models, featuringlarger fins and raised canopy enclosures, commenced in June1939, with ten joining VF-3 of the Saratoga Air Group, aug-menting the unit’s existing F3F-1s. However, during this time-frame, reports of air fighting from Spain and other parts of theworld strongly indicated that American fighters needed to befaster and better armed, and with this in mind, BuAer directedBrewster to forego future deliveries of F2A-1s to await devel-opment of the improved F2A-2. (Note, the undelivered 44 F2A-1s were ultimately exported to Finland, where they went on toachieve an impressive combat record against the Soviet AirForce).

The XF2A-2, fitted with a 1,200-hp R-1820-40 engine anda Curtiss Electric propeller, was delivered to Anacostia inJuly 1939. To compensate for the weight added forward,the fuselage had been shortened eight inches between thefirewall and the leading edge of the wing. Once testing re-vealed a 25 mph increase in top speed and improved rate- of- climb (3,100 feet- per- minute), BuAer authorized Brew-ster to manufacture a further 43 F2A-2s. Political events,however, namely production of similar export models forGreat Britain and Belgium, caused deliveries of Navy F2A-2s to be delayed until the fall of 1940, when they beganreequipping VF-2 aboard Lexington. And starting with the30th production model, the type came with self- sealing fueltanks and a .50-caliber machine gun added to each wing.The final batch of F2A-2s, received before year- end,entered service with VF-3 on Saratoga.

But after receiving the Navy’s first monoplane fighterproduction contract, Brewster’s fortunes dwindled rapidly.Even before 1940 ended, BuAer had decided to limit de-velopment of the F2A, which, according to some, had moreto do with the company’s management problems and un-predictable production schedules than the attributes of itsairplanes, and in January 1941, Brewster received its finalfighter order from BuAer. The 108 F2A-3s, delivered fromJuly to December 1941, differed from the -2s in having 400lbs. of armor plating added around the cockpit and provisionfor 80 more gallons of fuel. The extra weight necessitateda ten- inch fuselage extension between the firewall and wingleading edge to regain balance. With no corresponding in-crease in power to offset extra weight, overall performancesuffered, and the shift in center- of- gravity degraded ma-neuverability. F2A-3s initially equipped VF-2, VF-3, andVS-201 (aboard Long Island, CVE-1) in fleet squadrons andreplaced the F3F-2s of Marine squadron VMF-221. By theend of 1941, however, VF-3 had reequipped with F4F-3s,and many F2A-2s and -3s were being reassigned to non- combat duties with shore- based fighter training establish-ments in Miami, Norfolk, and San Diego. VF-2 receivedF4F-3s in early 1942, prior to the Battle of the Coral Sea,

leaving VMF-221 as the only combat unit still equipped withthe type. When the Japanese struck Midway in June, MarineF2A-3s defending the island proved to be no match for the su-perior firepower and maneuverability of attacking Zeros, withthe consequence that 13 of 19 were shot down during the firstday of the battle; surviving F2As were withdrawn from VMF-211 immediately afterward.

Grumman F4F Wildcat—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (F4F-3)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp., Bethpage, New York.Total produced: 1,977 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 1,200-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-76 Twin Wasp 14-

cylinder radial driving a three- bladed Curtiss Electric controllablepropeller.

Armament: Four fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machine guns and two100-lb. bombs carried on external racks.


Grumman F4F-3

Performance: Max. speed328 mph at 21,000 ft.;ceiling 37,500 ft.; com-bat range 845 mi. com-bat, 1,690 mi. max.

Weights: 5,342 lbs. empty,7,002 lbs. loaded.

Dimensions: Span 38 ft.,length 28 ft. 9 in., wingarea 260 sq. ft.

Originally, in early1936, BuAer had author-ized Grumman to proceedwith the XF4F-1 as an im-proved biplane to be pow-ered by either a WrightXR-1670 or a Pratt &Whitney R-1535 engine,but in August the sameyear, a month after order-ing Brewster’s XF2A-1monoplane, it cancelledGrumman’s biplane proj-ect in favor of a mono-plane design that wouldbecome the XF4F-2. In amove that was to have im-portant consequences,BuAer departed from itsusual policy of specifyingthe same engines for com-peting prototypes, direct-ing Grumman instead todevelop the XF4F-2around the new 1,050-hpPratt & Whit ney R-1830 twin- row powerplant.Grum man, working fastto catch up with Brewster,had the XF4F-2 flying bySeptember 1937 and on itsway to NAS Anacostiatwo months ahead of therival XF2A-1. Bearing astrong family resem -blance to the F2F andF3F, the XF4F-2 emergedas a stubby, mid- wing de-sign with rounded wing -tips and tail surfaces, andused the proven inward- retracting gear systemseen on Grumman bi-planes. But the competi-tive fly- off held in thespring of 1938 proved to


Top: An XF4F-2 in early 1938 during trials held at NAS Anacostia. While marginally faster than therival XF2A-1, the XF4F-2’s flying characteristics did not compare as favorably. Middle: The originalconfiguration of the XF4F-3 as seen in early 1939. A combination of 1,200-hp XR-1830-76 engine andaerodynamic refinements boosted performance and improved overall handling and maneuverability.Bottom: A lineup of VF-3 F4F-3s from Sara toga’s Air Group during 1941 war games. Note “white cross”markings. VF-3 had only recently traded its F2A-1s and F3F-1s for new F4Fs.

be disappointing: though faster (288 mph vs. 277 mph), theXF4F-2’s general flying characteristics did not compare favor-ably with the XF2A-1, then, before the fly- off could be com-pleted, it was damaged in a forced landing caused by an enginefailure. As a consequence, in June 1938, Brewster received theinitial production contract while the XF4F-2 was returned toGrum man for repairs.

BuAer, determining that the XF4F should remain underdevelopment as a second fighter option, approached Grummanto make some far- reaching modifications which, among otherthings, included installation of a 1,200-hp XR-1830-76 enginewith a two- stage supercharger. The follow- on XF4F-3, featuringa fuselage lengthened by two feet, squared- off wings havingincreased span and area, plus enlarged and reshaped tail sur-faces, was flown in February 1939 and delivered to Anacostiasoon afterward. Other than cooling problems with the new en-gine, trials of the XF4F-3 exceeded expectations: both per-formance and maneuverability had improved significantly, topspeed (335 mph) having increased having by 50 mph. Grum-man’s efforts were decisively rewarded in August 1939 whenBuAer awarded a contract for 78 F4F-3s. And further refine-ments such as raising the tailplane, moving the cowling intakes,and relocating all armament to the wings, resulted in the defini-tive F4F-3 production variant.

Like Brewster and a number of other American militaryaircraft contractors, Grumman’s ability to deliver new F4F-3sto the Navy was shaped by the start of World War II in Europe:priority on the first production models, 81 G-36As, had beenpromised to the French Aéronavale, then after France fell tothe Germans in June 1940, production (subsequently increasedto 90) was reallocated to Great Britain. The British G-36As,known as Martlet Is, differed from the F4F-3 in having a single- row Wright R-1820-S3C engine and six .50-cal wing guns (inplace of the six 7.5-mm guns of the original French prototype).After entering service with the FleetAir Arm during the fall of 1940, twoMartlet Is scored the type’s first com-bat victory in December when theyshot down a Junkers Ju88 off ScapaFlow. The first U.S. Navy F4F-3sreached the fleet in December 1940,replacing the F3Fs of VF-41(formerly VF-4) of Ranger’s AirGroup, and all 78 had been receivedby February 1941. During thisinterval, BuAer ordered another 237F4F-3s, including 61 aircraft re- designated as the F4F-3A (originallytested in November 1940 as theXF4F-6), which, due to productionshortages, came with R-1830-90 en-gines having single- stage supercharg-ers.

Grumman had begun work onthe XF4F-4, a folding wing version

armed with six .50-cal. wing guns, as early as March 1940, butother priorities—i.e., delivery of 130 Twin- Wasp–powered Mart-let IIs and IIIs to Great Britain—delayed its first flight untilApril 1941. (Note, the Martlet IIIs, originally ordered by Greeceas the F4F-3A, were taken over by Britain prior to delivery.)Two aircraft equipped with 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-40 engineswere tested as the XF4F-5 in June of 1940, but since their per-formance did not compare favorably to the F4F-3, noproduction was undertaken. Grumman resumed deliveries ofF4F-3s and -3As, now known as Wildcats, during the springof 1941, and by the end of the year, the type was equipping sevenNavy squadrons (VF-3, Saratoga; VF-5 and VF-41, Ranger;VF-6, Enterprise; VF-71 and -72, Wasp; and VF-8, Hornet)plus two Marine squadrons (VMF-121, Quantico; and VMF-211, then detached from Ewa to Wake Island).

The first five of 1,169 F4F-4s ordered by BuAer during 1941were delivered in November of that year, and by the spring of1942, sufficient numbers had reached fleet squadrons in timeto participate in the Battle of Midway the following June. Twenty- one F4F-7 photo- reconnaissance versions ordered in1941, essentially unarmed F4F-3s having greater fuel capacity,were also delivered in 1942. And before World War II ended,another 6,027 Wildcats would be licensed and produced byGeneral Motors, 1,150 FM-1s similar to the F4F-4 and 4,777FM-2s, the production version of the XF4F-8, powered by a1,350-hp Wright R-1820-56 engine and having a taller fin. OneF4F-3 fitted with twin floats was tested in early 1942 as theF4F-3S, but no production resulted.

Grumman F5F Skyrocket—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF5F-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp., Bethpage, New York.


The first twin-engine carrier fighter, the XF5F-1, as flown in April 1940. The design objectivewas to fit two engines on the most compact airframe possible. This was superceded by theXF7F-1 design proposal in mid–1941.

Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-40 Cyclone

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed Curtiss Electric controllable pro-pellers.

Armament: Four fixed forward- firing .50-cal. machineguns.

Performance: Max. speed 383 mph at s.1.; ceiling34,500 ft.; combat range 780 mi. combat, 1,170mi. max.


303 sq. ft.

Even as the Brewster XF2A-1 and Grum -man XF4F-2 were in the midst of trials duringearly 1938, BuAer was making preparations toinitiate a far more ambitious set of new mono-plane fighter requirements. Develop ment con-tracts were issued simultaneously on June 30,1938, one to Grumman for its twin- engine modelG-34, to be delivered as the XF5F-1, and asecond to Vought for its model V-166B as theXF4U-1. Although Grumman’s XF5F-1 twin- engine concept was unorthodox, it potentiallyoffered a means of doubling available horse -power in an airframe still compact enough to fitaboard existing carriers. Keeping length to aminimum, the design of the XF5F-1 was ar -ranged so that the leading edge of the wing ac-tually extended forward of the fuselage, with thetwo engine nacelles protruding ahead of thewing. In order to enhance directional stability,twin fins and rudders were located in the airflowbehind the engines.

With Grumman test pilot G. A. Gilles at thecontrols, the XF5F-1 made its first flight fromthe Bethpage plant on April 1, 1940, but enginecooling problems, requiring modifications to theoil cooling ducts, delayed commencement ofofficial military trials. Before delivery to Ana-costia, BuAer directed Grumman to lower theheight of the canopy and install four .50-cal. machine guns inplace of the two 23-mm Madsen cannon originally planned.Navy testing of the XF5F-1 continued until February 1941, atwhich point the prototype was returned to the factory for ex-tensive modifications. To improve airflow, large spinners wereadded to the props, the nose lengthened, and the engine nacellesextended past the trailing edge of the wing. Testing of theXF5F-1 resumed in July 1941, but soon afterward, BuAerdecided against production of the type in favor of Grumman’snewer twin- engine model G-51, which had been ordered in Juneas the XF7F-1.

Once the official testing program ended, the XF5F-1 re-mained at Anacostia where it was used for various test purposesuntil late 1944, when it was damaged beyond repair as the resultof a belly landing.

Bell FL Airabonita—1940

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XFL-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Bell Aircraft Corp., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 1,150-hp Allison V-1710-6 12-cylinder water- cooled

inline engine driving a three- bladed Curtiss Electric controllablepropeller.

Armament: (none installed).Performance: Max. speed 338 mph at 11,000 ft.; ceiling 30,900 ft.;

combat range 965 mi. combat, 1,475 mi. max.Weights: 5,161 lbs. empty, 6,651 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 35 ft., length 29 ft. 9 in., wing area 232 sq. ft.

In November 1938, only five months after ordering newfighter prototypes from Grumman (XF5F-1) and Vought


Grumman XF5F-1

(XF4U-1), BuAer gave Bell a contractto build yet another fighter contestantas the XFL-1. Bell, a fairly newmilitary contractor at the time, was al-ready at an advanced stage of con-struction on the similar XP-39 proto-type, a mid- engine, tricycle gearfighter being developed for the Army.The naval variant, though retaining thesame Allison V-12 powerplantmounted aft of the cockpit, differed inhaving arresting gear, underwingcoolant radiators, a conventional (tail-wheel) landing gear configuration, anda taller fin. Other changes included a

raised canopy to improve over- the- nose visibility andan airframe strengthened to withstand the rigors ofcarrier operations. Armament, when installed, wouldbe the heaviest yet specified for a naval fighter, con-sisting of a 37-mm cannon firing through the propellerhub, plus two synchronized .30-caliber machine gunsin the nose.

The XFL-1 prototype was rolled out and made itsfirst flight on May 13, 1940, but a series of problemsencountered with its Allison engine prevented deliveryto NAS Anacostia until February 1941. Carrier decktrials subsequently revealed poor pitch stability due tothe aft center- of- gravity and landing gear too weak forsustained operations. The XFL-1 was returned to Bellfor modifications in December 1941, but before theprototype could be redelivered to Anacostia, BuAerdetermined that the aircraft lacked further developmentpotential and cancelled the program.

Vought F4U Corsair—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XF4U-1)

Type: One- place carrier fighter.Manufacturer: Chance Vought Div. of United Aircraft Corp.,

Stratford, Connecticut.Total produced: 1 (USN; 14,346 ultimately produced in seven

major versions).Power plant: One 1,850-hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-4

Double Wasp 18-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driv-ing a three- bladed Hamilton Standard constant- speedpropeller.

Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gunsin the nose, one .50-cal.

Performance: Max. speed 405 mph at 20,000 ft.; ceiling35,200 ft.; range 1,070 mi. max.


sq. ft.


Bell XFL-1

The XFL-1 as seen upon delivery in early 1941. Carrierlanding trials revealed that its aft center-of-gravitycaused poor pitch stability. Cancelled in 1942.

Probably the best- known aircraft to bedesigned by Rex Beisel, the Vought F4Uwas the first American fighter to exceed400 mph in level flight, and though univer-sally regarded as one of the most outstand-ing air superiority fighters of World War II,its prowess as a ground attack platformkept it in production longer (1942–1952)than any other type of Navy or Marine propeller- driven fighter. Its origins can betraced to January 1938 when Vought ten-dered two new fighter proposals to BuAer,one for a model V-166A to be powered bya Pratt & Whitney R-1830 engine and an-other for a larger model V-166B to be de-signed around Pratt & Whitney’s as yetuntested XR-2800 18-cylinder, twin- rowpowerplant. On June 30, 1938, on the prem-ise that the experimental engine would beready in time (note, the engine was in factsuccessfully bench- tested in 1939), BuAergave Vought a contract to develop the morespeculative V-166B as a single prototypeunder the designation XF4U-1. As workproceeded, partly out of an effort to provideadequate ground clearance for the large- diameter propeller (i.e., 13 ft., 4 in.), Bei -sel’s team created the XF4U-1’s most no-ticeable characteristic—inverted gull wingsthat not only reduced the length of the mainlanding gear legs and the correspondingground angle, but also produced the opti-mum angle for minimum drag at the wing- fuselage junction. Other low- drag featuresincluded spot- welded skin assemblies andoil cooler and air intakes buried in the wingroots. The main gear system was innova-tive, pinioning 90 degrees while retractingrearward so that the wheels lay flush withinthe wings under wheel doors. Forty five- pound bombs, enclosed in two underwingbays, were intended to be dropped onto abomber formation from above, with thepilot aiming through a small window onthe belly of the fuselage (a feature not in-corporated on production models).

The XF4U-1 made its first flight from the Stratford planton May 29, 1940, piloted by Lyman A. Bullard, Jr., and justfour months later, between Stratford and Hartford, attained 404mph in level flight, the first American- built fighter to do so.But despite its stunning speed, recent intelligence reports fromthe European air war indicated that, as designed, the new fighterwould be deficient in combat. To survive the conditions re-ported, the XF4U-1 would need heavier gun armament, morearmor protection, and self- sealing fuel tanks. The revisions re-

quired to correct the basic design were drastic: the fuel tankswould have to be moved from the wings to the fuselage to makeroom for four more .50 caliber guns, and in order to place thenew fuselage tank over the center of gravity, it would be nec-essary to move the cockpit three feet aft. In June 1941, after ap-proving the proposed changes, BuAer gave Vought a contractto produce 585 aircraft as the F4U-1. The first productionmodel, dubbed the Corsair, was flown on June 25, 1942,followed by initial deliveries of aircraft for operational trialsin late July.


Vought XF4U-1

But the Navy’s quest for an unequaled fighter was not tobe realized: in carrier trials conducted aboard Sangaman (CVE-26) during September 1942, the F4U-1 failed to pass deck qual-ifications. Restricted visibility from the aft- located cockpit dur-ing the approach, combined with poor handling characteristicsat low airspeeds, caused the type to be rated unsuitable for fur-ther carrier operations. As a direct consequence, F4U-1s wereissued to Marine land- based units, the first being VMF-124.After numerous improvements, Corsairs were finally clearedfor carrier operations in mid–1944, however, as events tran-spired, F4U-1Ds did not actually embark aboard Navy carriersfor combat duties until January 1945.

OBSERVATION AND SCOUT AIRCRAFT

Synopsis of Observation andScout Aircraft Procurement

As with attack and fighter types, the real potential of ob-servation and scout aircraft in Navy service was not realizeduntil they had been adapted to operate from ships, starting in1922 with the assignment of World War I–era Vought VE-7floatplanes (see page 103) to battleships. At practically the sametime, wheeled versions of the VE-7 were among the first aircraftto be used for experiments aboard the USS Langley (CV-1), theNavy’s first carrier. When attempts to develop larger, three- place Martin MO and Naval Aircraft Factory NO/Martin M2Ofloatplanes for shipboard use in 1923 and 1924 proved unsuc-cessful, the Vought UO, basically an improved derivative of the

VE-7, became the next standard observation type. After prob-lematic trials conducted from 1923 to 1926 with two small float-planes, the Cox- Klemin XS and Martin MS, naval officials con-cluded that the idea of operating scout aircraft from submarineswas not practical.

The observation role grew to include ship- to- shore utilityduties as the first shipboard amphibians, Loening OLs, beganentering service in 1925. Because of different operational re-quirements, ex–Army Airco DH-4s, which could carry bombs,were supplied to Marine observation units from 1921 to 1925.The Vought O2U, the first naval aircraft actually designed fromthe ground up for observation, began reaching service in 1927,with float- equipped variants assigned to battleships and cruisersand wheeled versions to carriers and land- based Marine units.From 1928, Marines began the process of replacing their out-dated DH-4s with new two- place Curtiss F8Cs, assigning themnew observation designations as the OC (F8C-1 and -3) andO2C (F8C-5).

In late the 1920s and early 1930s, as the fleet’s need formore diverse types of aircraft became more apparent, BuAerbegan evolving observation and scout requirements that weretailored to more narrow operational conditions. The “light ob-servation” requirement of 1929, ultimately leading to procure-ment of the Berliner- Joyce OJ for duty aboard light cruisers,represented an attempt to gain range without increasing catapultweight. BuAer took matters a step further in 1931 when itspecified distinct versions of Vought’s new O3U: a lighter “ob-servation” variant for battleships and cruisers (O3U-1 and -3)and a more powerful and heavily armed “scout” for carriersand land- based Marine units (initially O3U-2 and -4 but laterchanged to SU-1, -2, and -3). The Navy revived the submarinescout concept in 1931 with the Loening SL, but abandoned the


The XF4U-1 as seen in 1940. It was the first American fighter to exceed 400 mph in level flight. Revisions to basic design due to newcombat requirements were drastic.

project again after two years of trials. From 1932 to 1934, withthe aim of procuring a long- range, armed scout for carriers,trials were carried out with the Bellanca SE, Curtiss S2C (anavalized version of the Army’s A-8), and Curtiss S3C (essen-tially an improved O2C-2), but none proved to be acceptable,and in any event, the armed- scout concept soon afterward be-came absorbed into an all- new “scout- bomber” requirement,which is discussed in more detail in the preceding section onAttack Aircraft.

Commencing in 1931, BuAer acquired several Pitcairn au-togyros as the XOP to assess their suitability for the carrier and land- based observation role and in 1934, also tested the float- equipped Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate XOZ, but discon-tinued all autogiro experiments in 1936. The advent of hangarson new heavy cruisers kindled a fresh string of aircraft devel-opments, the first being issued in 1931 as an “amphibious cruiserscout” requirement. However, evaluations of three boat- hulledamphibians during 1932 and 1933—Great Lakes SG, LoeningS2L, and Sikorsky SS—failed to produce a satisfactory air-craft, prompting BuAer to initiate a second round of com-petition in 1934 that ultimately ended with the procurementof the Curtiss SOC as the fleet’s standard cruiser floatplane.Thereafter, aircraft specialized for cruiser service were clas-sified as “scout- observation” types or SO, whereas thosedestined for battleships became “observation- scout” or OS.The first new OS requirement appeared in 1936 with thegoal of finding a modern replacement for obsolescent O3Usand to obtain additional floatplanes for the first new battle-ships planned since adoption of the Washington NavalTreaty in 1922 (i.e., BB-55 and -56). After evaluating theNaval Aircraft Factory XOSN, Stearman XOSS, and VoughtXOS2U during 1938, BuAer selected Vought’s candidatefor quantity production, which, as the OS2U-1, was the first float- equipped monoplane to be accepted for fleet service.

But even before the first OS2U had flown, naval offi-cials were already moving forward with plans to obtain anew type of floatplane for the heavy and light cruisers underconstruction (12 ships at the time), and in 1937, issued a de-tailed SO specification calling for a monoplane to be pow-ered by an experi mental, air- cooled V-12 engine (i.e., 500-hp Ranger XV-770). Development contracts weresubsequently issued for two proto types, the Curtiss XSO3Cand Vought XSO2U, and flight trials between them beganin early 1940. Curtiss received the production contract laterthat year, not because its XSO3C was a better aircraft, butdue to the fact that Vought, faced with a large backlog ofOS2U and F4U orders, simply lacked the plant capacity to mass- produce another type of aircraft. And as events turnedout, persistent operational difficulties with productionSO3C-1s caused the type to be declared unfit for shipboardservice in mid–1942, with the consequence that the olderbiplane SOCs (together with license- built NAF SONs) re-mained in service aboard cruisers for most of the durationof World War II.

Vought VE-7 and -9—1919TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (VE-7H)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer, observation, and fighter.Manufacturer: Chance Vought Corp., Long Island City, New York;

and Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced : 140 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 180-hp Wright- Hispano E-2 8-cylinder water- cooled

inline engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament (none VE-7, -7H, -9): one fixed forward- firing .303-cal.

Vickers machine gun (VE-7S, SF) and one flexible .30-cal. Lewismachine gun in the rear cockpit (VE-7G,GF).



Although listed here under observation, the VE-7 and -9served in a variety of roles through most of the 1920s. A two- bay biplane of wooden construction, powered by a license- built150-hp Hispano- Suiza engine (E-1), the VE-7 was initially eval-


Vought VE-7G

uated during 1918 by the Army as an advanced trainer, then in1919, the Navy ordered 20 standard VE-7s that entered serviceas landplane trainers. This transaction marked the beginningof a relationship with Vought—as a major naval aircraft con-tractor—that would continue for over 60 years. From 1919 to1922, Vought delivered another 20 VE-7s and NAF completeda further 79 examples in four different versions. Twenty NAFVE-7G/GFs (F denoted addition of flotation gear) used fortraining and observation, emerged in 1920 with an uprated E-2 engine and a Lewis machine gun mounted on a scarf ring inthe rear cockpit. The 50 NAF- built VE-7S/SF variants deliveredin 1921 and 1922 were single- place fighters armed with a fixedVickers machine gun and served with VF-2 and the Marine’sFirst Aviation Group at Quantico. NAF also built nine float- equipped, unarmed VE-7Hs stressed for catapulting that oper-ated as gun spotters aboard battleships. VE-7Hs could be dis-tinguished by the larger tail fin needed to offset the side areaof the float.

After installation of an 180-hp Wright- Hispano engine andlarger tailfin, one NAF- built VE-7 became the first VE-9, and21 identical examples were subsequently built by Vought andaccepted into service during 1922 and 1923. VE-9s typicallycarried no armament and could be rigged as either landplanesor floatplanes. Both VE-7s and VE-9s were phased out of activeNavy service from 1925 to 1927, but one or two examples re-mained operational with the Marines until mid–1928.

Loening/Naval Aircraft FactoryM-8 Series (LS)—1919

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (M-8-1)

Type: Two- place, land- based observation.Manufacturer: Loening Aeronautical Engr. Co., New York, New York;

Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced : 43 (USN)Powerplant: One 300-hp Wright- Hispano H-3 8-cylinder water- cooled

inline engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: Two flexible .30-cal. Lewis machine guns in the rear cock-

pit.Performance: Max. speed 125 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,750 ft.; range 550

mi.


The Standard version VE-7 seen in 1928, the last example of thetype to be operated by VO-8M out of San Diego. It was replacedthe same year by the new Curtiss F8C-1s (re-designated OC-1s).

The float-equipped VE-7H, also stressed for catapulting, becamethe first standard shipboard type. The aircraft depicted is oneof nine VE-7Hs built by the Naval Aircraft Factory in 1922.Vought built 21 more in 1923.

Vought VE-7H


area 229 sq. ft.

After organizing his own company in 1918,aeronautical engineer Grover C. Loening sold theWar Department on the idea of developing a two- seat monoplane fighter that he claimed would de-liver performance superior to that of the RFC’sbiplane Bristol F.2b Fighter. The first M-8, ap-parently flown sometime in late 1918, emergedwith broad- chord wings attached to the upperfuselage edge, each braced by a pair of airfoil- shaped struts that added aerodynamic lift. It alsointroduced a tunnel- type radiator below the en-gine, which provided better streamlining than themore common flat- nosed types. Performance wasgood enough that Loening received a provisionalWar Department order for 5,000 M-8s, but as aresult of the armistice in November 1918, the en-tire contract was terminated before any aircraftcould be built. Then in June 1919, Loening ob-tained the first of many Navy contracts when sixM-8-0s were ordered initially as two- seatfighters.

The first Navy M-8-0 was damaged beyondrepair on its delivery flight in September 1919,however, the other five later arrived withoutmishap and were placed into service as observa-tion types rather than fighters, and in 1920 and1921, NAF built a further 36 to the same patternas the M-8-1. In operational use, M-8s (comparedto biplane observation types) were veryunpopular with aircrews due to the restricted vis-ibility over their wide wings, so that most werewithdrawn after only two or three years ofservice. One M-8-1 fitted with a smaller set ofwings participated as a Navyentry in the 1920 Pulitzerrace. An additional M-8 air-frame completed by Loeningin 1921 as the LS-1 seaplanefeatured a five- foot increasein wingspan and an unusualRichardson pontoon systemthat could be rigged as a sin-gle float or split along thecenterline to form twinfloats. The LS-1 was not suc-cessful, but Loening man-aged to sell a further 14 M-8types to the Army in 1921and 1922 as the PW-2 and -2A.


One of 36 M-8-1s built by the Naval Aircraft Factory in 1920. High-mounted wings served to seriouslyrestrict the downward visibility of the observer. The plane was withdrawn after only three years ofservice.

Loening M-8

Martin K- IV—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (K- IV)

Type: Single- place trainer submarine scout float-plane.

Manufacturer: James V. Martin Aeroplane Co.,Elyra, Ohio.

Total produced : 3 (USN)Powerplant: one 60-hp Lawrence L-4 3-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two-bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 82 mph at s.1.; ceiling11,400 ft.; range 150 mi. (est.).

Weights: 646 lbs. empty, 940 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 24 ft. 2 in., length 17 ft., wing

area 100 sq. ft. (est.).

Also known as the “Kitten Floatplane,”the K- IV was not a product of the well- knownGlenn L. Martin Co. but a design of the short- lived James V. Martin Aeroplane Co. ofElyra, Ohio. The K- IV appeared as an en-

larged floatplane develop ment of Martin’s smaller K- III(15-foot span), which had been unsuccessfully offered tothe Army in 1918. Three K- IVs were procured by the NavyDepartment in 1921 to be evaluated for the submarinescout role alongside the Macchi M.16 and Heinkel- CasparU.1 (see Appendix 1). Development was dropped in favorof the Cox- Clemin XS and Martin MS.

Aeromarine AS—1922TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (AS-2)

Type: Two- place observation floatplane.Manufacturer: Aeromarine Plane and Motor Corp., Keyport,

New Jersey.Total produced : 3 (USN)Powerplant: One 300-hp Wright- Hispano E 8-cylinder water-

cooled inline engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitchwooden propeller.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. Lewis machine gun in the rearcockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 117 mph at s.1.; ceiling 19,300 ft.; range500 mi.


sq. ft.

Designed by Charles Willard and inspired by the lay-out of the German Hansa- Brandenburg twin- floatseaplane of 1917, the Navy Department contracted withAeromarine in 1921 to build three similar aircraft billedas “fighting ship machines” under the designation AS-1.The design was characterized by two bays of metal N- type interplane struts and an underslung fin and rudder


J.V. Martin K-4

Three of these diminutive J. V. Martin “Kitten Floatplanes”were tested in 1921 for the submarine scout role. Develop-ment was discontinued in favor of the Cox-Klemin XS andMartin MS.

that gave the gunner a unobstructed field of fire to the rear.After the first AS-1 appeared in 1922 with an under- mountedradiator, the next two examples were completed and deliveredas AS-2s with front- mounted radiators. Though evaluated forthe armed observation role, no operational details about theaircraft were recorded.

Elias EM/EO—1922TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (EM-2)

Type: Two- place multi- purpose landplane or floatplane.Manufacturer: G. Elias and Brother, Buffalo, New York.Total produced : 7 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 400-hp Liberty 12-cylinder water- cooled inline

engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: One flexible .30-cal. Lewis machine gun in the rear cock-


mi.Weights: 2,933 lbs. empty, 3,916 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 39 ft. 8 in., length 28 ft. 6 in., wing area 382 sq. ft.

The EM stands as having been the first airplane designedsolely to a Marine Corps specification. The requirement, orig-inally issued in 1919, called for a multi- purpose expeditionary


Left: The Aeromarine AS was evaluated during 1921 and 1922for the armed observation role. Fin and rudder were mountedventrally to give the rear gunner an unobstructed field of fire.No production was undertaken.

Aeromarine AS-2

Elias EM-2

aircraft that would be readily convertible to wheels or floats.The EM-1, completed in 1922 with a 300-hp Wright- Hispanoengine and unequal span wings, posted a top speed of only 90mph and was deemed unacceptable. A second aircraft poweredby a Liberty 12 engine and having equal span wings and a largerrudder was evaluated by the Marines later the same year as theEM-2. After showing a 21 mph increase in speed, five moreEM-2s were ordered, but by the time they were deliveredMarine units had decided instead to equip expeditionary unitswith less expensive DH-4Bs, and the five EM-2s went into toNavy service as observation types. One EM-2 converted to acenter float configuration was subsequently re- designated EO-1. Elias also built several TA-1 trainers and one twin- engineNBS-3 bomber for the Army, but the company apparentlyceased operations during the late 1920s.

Vought UO/FU—1922

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS(UO-1 SEAPLANE [FU-1])

Type: Two- place observation [one- place fighter] landplane or float-plane.

Manufacturer: Chance Vought Corp., Long Island City, New York.Total produced : 141 (USN, USCG)Powerplant: One 200-hp Lawrence (later Wright J-3) [220-hp Wright

J-5] 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden [metal] propeller.

Armament: None [two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns].Performance: Max. speed 124 mph at s.1. [147 mph at 13,000 ft.];

ceiling 18,000 [26,500] ft.; range 398 [410] mi.Weights: 1,494 lbs. [2,074 lbs.] empty, 2,305 lbs. [2,774 lbs.] loaded.Dimensions: Span 34 ft. 4 in., length 24 ft. 4 in. [28 ft. 4in.], wing

area 290 [270] sq. ft.

One of the most widely used naval aircraft of the 1920s,the UO first appeared in 1922 as a direct development ofVought’s VE-7. The type was originally to have been poweredby a 250-hp Aeromarine U-873 water- cooled engine but a de-cision was made to switch to a Lawrence J-1 radial before thefirst example had flown. While similar in structure to the VE-7,


This EM-2, pictured in 1922, was the first of five originally pro-cured for the Marines but subsequently allocated to Navy obser-vation units after the Marines decided to equip with less ex -pensive DH-4Bs.

Vought UO-1

A UO-1 of VO-3 is seen in 1924 being hoisted aboard the recentlycommissioned light cruiser Richmond (CL-9). It became the stan-dard battleship and cruiser floatplane until replaced by O2U-1sin 1927 and 1928.

the UO-1 came with a new, rounded fuselage cross- section and reshaped tail surface, plus cheek- type fuel tanks andredesigned cabane strut rigging that improved cockpit accessand visibility. UO-1s were built and delivered under a series ofcontracts running from the early to mid–1920s and a majority,as floatplanes, attached to various battleship and cruiser unitsthroughout the fleet. At least twelve, rigged as landplanes, werefitted with arresting gear and used for utility duties aboard allthree of the Navy’s carriers. The Navy began phasing out UO-1s from battleships and cruisers as new Vought O2Us arrivedto replace them in 1927 and 1928, though some remained inservice a few years longer at shore bases and with reservesquadrons. One UO-1 stripped down and fitted with the originalAeromarine engine by NAF in 1922 was, as the UO-2, enteredin the Curtiss Marine Trophy race the same year but was dam-aged at the start of the race.

Twenty aircraft ordered from Vought in mid–1926 as UO-3 single- seaters were intended to meet an interim BuAerrequirement for floatplane fighters aboard battleships. The UO-3 differed in having a 220-hp Wright J-5 engine with aRootes integral supercharger, narrower- chord wings with athicker N-9 airfoil and rounded tips, a four- foot fuselage ex-tension aft of the cockpit, two fixed machine guns, and a smallervertical fin. When initially delivered in January 1927 under thenew designation FU-1, it became the first type of naval aircraftto achieve its maximum speed above sea level. Float- equippedFU-1s were deployed in one or two- plane detachments aboardbattleships in 1927 and 1928; then, rigged with wheels and ar-resting gear, assigned to VF-2B aboard Langley, where theyserved until being replaced by Boeing F3Bs during 1929. SomeFU-1s were converted to a two- seat configuration as FU-2s andserved aboard all three carriers as utility aircraft until 1932. In1926, two UOs built with FU-1 wings and J-5 engines were de-livered to the Coast Guard as the UO-4 and remained in activeservice until 1935.

Martin MO—1923

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (MO-1 SEAPLANE VERSION)

Type: Three- place observation landplane or floatplane.Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced : 36 (USN)Powerplant: One 435-hp Curtiss D 12-cylinder water- cooled inline en-

gine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: One flexible .30-cal. Lewis machine gun in the rear cock-


mi.Weights: 3,440 lbs. empty, 4,945 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 53 ft. 1 in., length 38 ft. 2 in., wing area 488 sq. ft.

The MO originated in response to a BuAer requirementissued in 1922 for a single- engine, three- place observation type,stressed for catapulting, that would be convertible to wheels orfloats. Martin, proposing a monoplane with an all- metal, fabric- covered structure that had been designed by a former Junkers


An armed, single-seat FU-1 of VF-2B while assigned to BattleshipDivision four in 1927. It was re-rigged with wheels and trans-ferred to Langley the next year.

Vought FU-1

engineer, received a contract to build 36 aircraft as the MO-1.The first example, rigged as a landplane, was apparently flownsometime in 1923, and the next six, with twin floats, were de-livered to VO-6 at Hampton Roads in early 1924 for serviceevaluations. Once testing revealed that the type was too under-powered for ship- borne catapult operations, they were replacedby smaller and lighter Vought VE-7Hs and UO-1s. MO-1s,rigged as landplanes apparently, were afterward used at variousshore stations for utility duties until 1926.

Cox- Klemin XS and Martin MS—1923TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XS-1)

Type: One- place submarine scout floatplane.Manufacturer: Cox- Klemin Aircraft Corp., College Point, New York;

Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced : 12 (USN, USMC)


Float-equipped MO-1s during their brief tenure aboard Missis-sippi (BB-41) in late 1924. Trials re vealed that the type, whenloaded, was seriously underpowered in catapult operations.

Martin MO-1

Cox-Klemin XS-1

Powerplant: One 60-hp Lawrence 3-cylinder air- cooled radial enginedriving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.

Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 103 mph at s.1.; ceiling 11,300 ft.; range (not

reported).Weights: Empty (not reported), 1,030 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 18 ft. 0 in., length 18 ft. 2 in., wing area 108 sq. ft.

Following demonstrations of the tiny Sperry M-1 Messen-ger biplane before the Army, officials at BuAer conceived theidea of designing a similarly small aircraft to be used as a scoutthat could be dismantled and stored in a waterproof containeraboard submarines. The design materialized as a twin- float bi-plane using struts in place of rigging wires to facilitate quickassembly and disassembly. Contracts were awarded to Cox- Klemin to build six aircraft of wooden construction as the XS-1, and to Martin for six more with fabric- covered, aluminumairframes and metal floats as the MS-1. All 12 of the submarinescouts were delivered to the Navy for initial trials during 1923and operational testing and evaluations with submarines con-tinued into late 1926, after which the program was terminatedand the aircraft scrapped. In 1923, when refitted with an 84-hpKinner 5-cylinder radial, one XS-1 was tested as the XS-2. TheMarines operated one XS-1 in San Diego in 1926 and 1927. Thesubmarine scout program was reactivated in 1931 with the Loen-ing XSL-1, reported below.

Naval Aircraft Factory NOand Martin M2O—1923

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NO-1)

Type: Three- place observation landplane or floatplane.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced : 6 (USN)Powerplant: One 350-hp Curtiss D 12-cylinder water- cooled inline en-

gine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: One flexible .30-cal. Lewis machine gun in the rear cock-

pit.



A more conservative approach to the three- place observa-tion requirement than the preceding Martin MO-1, the NO arose


One of six MS-1s delivered for trials in 1923. MS-1 and XS-1 wereidentical except for type of airframe materials. Exercises withsubmarine S-1 continued until late 1926, when further testingwas deemed impractical.

Martin M2O-1

The NAF NO-1 in pictured in 1923 or 1924. M2O and NO wereboth powered by Curtiss D-12 engines and identical except forsmall details. Note W-types struts in place of usual rigging wires.

from a BuAer design in which construction contracts were as-signed to both NAF and Martin during 1923 for three aircrafteach. While the identity of the designer is not recorded any-where, the NO/M2O incorporated a structural design using W- type and N- type struts very similar to those of the TS fighterdesigned by Rex Beisel in 1921. Martin’s M2O-1 was the firstto fly, sometime in 1923, and all of six ordered had been deliv-ered before the end of 1924. The chief differences between theNAF and Martin versions appear to have been a spinner, indi-vidual exhaust stacks, and a slightly taller fin and rudder ap-pearing on the M2O-1. One NAF aircraft retrofitted with a 440-hp Packard 1A-1500 engine was tested asthe NO-2, but no performance details werereported. Not placed in quantity produc-tion, the type served at various shore de-tachments until withdrawn in 1926 and1927.

Loening OL, HL—1923

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (OL-2[OL-9])

Type: Three- place military observation and util-ity amphibian.

Manufacturer: Loening Aeronautical Engineer-ing Co., New York, New York

Total produced: 160 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: one 400-hp Liberty 12-cylinder

water- cooled engine driving a four-bladedwooden fixed- pitch propeller [one 450-hpPratt & Whitney R-1340-4 Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a three- bladed groundadjustable propeller].

Armament: one flexible .30-caliber Lewis ma-chine gun in the rear cockpit, [one fixed.30-caliber machine in the upper wing; andfour 114-lb. bombs on wing racks].

Performance: max. speed 121 mph [122 mph];ceiling 12,100 ft. [14,300 ft.]; range 405 mi.[625 mi.].

Weights: 3,540 lbs. [3,469 lbs.] empty, 5,010lbs. [5,404] loaded.

Dimensions: span 45 ft. 0 in., length 33 ft. 10in. [34 ft. 19 in.], wing area 500 sq. ft. [502sq. ft].

When the first examples appeared in1923, Grover C. Loening’s “shoehorn” se-ries of observation and utility planes werereally flying boat–floatplane hybrids inwhich the upper fuselage faired into a mainfloat that extended all the way aft tosupport the tail group. This novel configu-ration, similar in many respects to that ofhis civil Flying Yacht of 1921, was con-ceived by Loening out of an desire to offeran amphibian whose performance wouldmatch a landplane having an engine ofsimilar horsepower. The manually operated

landing gear used a system of sprockets and chains to retractinto the main float. The original prototype was delivered to theArmy in 1923 as the XCOA-1 (the C was later dropped) andnine production models followed in 1924. A Navy prototypepowered by a 440-hp Packard engine and having a third cockpitwas delivered in 1925 as the XOL-1. The same year, the Navy ac -quired five Liberty- powered OA-1s, placing them in service asOL-2s to be used in the 1925 Arctic Expedition, and four essen -tially identical aircraft were purchased from Loening as OL-3s.The first of six OL-4s, which differed in having a reshaped andbalanced rudder, revised cowling, and three- bladed metal pro-


Loening OL-2

peller was delivered in early 1926. These were followed by threevery similar OL-5s, which bore the distinction of being the firstaircraft ordered specifically for use by the Coast Guard.

Flown in late 1926, the OL-6 came with a 475-hp PackardV-12 engine and a third cockpit, and twenty- six production ex-amples were delivered from early to mid–1927. During the sametimeframe, twenty- four very similar OA-1As and Bs were alsoproduced for the Army, followed by ten OA-1Cs with reshapedtails. As the wingspan of the OLs was too large to enable themfit onto the deck elevators of the Navy’s new aircraft carriers,one OL-6 modified in mid–1927 with a smaller wing and athicker airfoil section was tested in mid–1927 as the XOL-7,but its performance proved to be disappointing and no produc-tion resulted. In late 1927, after BuAer specified that all futurenaval aircraft would be equipped with air- cooled engines, Loen-ing modified the Last OL-6 to accept installation of an R-1340Wasp radial engine and delivered it as the XOL-8. After trials,twenty production models were delivered during 1928 as theOL-8, followed in 1929 by twenty nearly identical OL-8As.Eight OA-2s, similar to OL-8As except for 480-hp Wright V-1640 V-12 water- cooled engines, were delivered to the Armythe same year.

The final version, the OL-9, which differed from the OL-8

in having a fixed .30-caliber machine in the upper wing andunderwing racks for four 114-lb. bombs, was produced during1931 and 1932 after Loening had been acquired by Keystone,and the last of 26 built accepted by the Navy in March 1932.Two airframes similar to the OL-8, completed as ambulance


Top: An OL-2, one of five Army OA-1s transferred to the Navyin 1925 to be used in the Arctic Expedition. The novel “shoehorn”configuration and gear-fold mechanism made OLs one of thefirst practical military amphibians. Middle: Introduced in 1926,the OL-6 featured a third cockpit and a 475-hp Packard enginedriving a three-bladed propeller. Most were assigned to battle-ships for utility and observation duties. Bottom: All OL-9s werebuilt between 1931 and 1932 after Loening had been acquired byKeystone. This aircraft is depicted in its later career serving inthe Naval Reserve at NRAB Oakland, California, in 1937.

Leoning OL-8

planes with a cabin occupying the spacebehind the pilot’s cockpit, were deliveredto the Navy in 1929 as XHL-1s, with oneassigned to the Marines. As newer Grum-man JF Ducks began arriving during themid–1930s, OL-8s and 9s were phased outof active service, with the final OL-9 beingwithdrawn by the end of 1937.

Douglas OD—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (OD-1)

Type: Two- place observation landplane.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa

Monica, California.Total produced : 2 (USMC)Powerplant: One 439-hp Liberty V-1650-1 12-

cylinder water- cooled inline enginedriving a two- bladed fixed- pitch woodenpropeller.

Armament: One flexible .30-cal. Lewis ma -chine gun in the rear cockpit.



As the O-2, a single- bay biplane of mixed constructionthat utilized a surplus Liberty powerplant, this aircraft becamethe Army’s standard observation type during the mid– and late1920s. In 1926, two O-2Cs, which differed from earlier versionsin having a nose- mounted radiator and split- axle landing gear,were delivered to the Marine West Coast Expeditionary Forcein San Diego and taken into service as the OD-1. Both examplesoperated with VO-8M until being replaced by Curtiss OC-2s(F8C-3s) in early 1930, and were used for utility duties untilwithdrawn from service altogether in 1931.

Vought O2U—1926TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (O2U-1 SEAPLANE)

Type: Two- place observation landplane or floatplane.Manufacturer: Chance Vought Corp., Long Island City, New York.Total produced : 291 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-88 Wasp 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed groundadjustable Hamilton- Standard metal propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun and oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rear cockpit.



The first of the “Corsair” series, the O2U represented aserious effort by the Navy to upgrade its observation fleet witha newer aircraft that incorporated recent structural and aero-dynamic improvements. After issuing requirements, BuAerawarded Vought a contract in mid–1926 to design and build twoaircraft for evaluation as the O2U-1. In line with recent BuAerpolicy, the new type was developed around Pratt & Whitney’snew 450-hp R-1340 Wasp engine, and though no arresting gearhad been specified, overall dimensions were small enough toenable it to fit onto the deck elevators of the new carriers. Thefirst prototype, flown on November 2, 1926, featured a spinner


Two OD-1s were procured for the Marines in 1926 and served alongside the DH-4Bsand O2B-1 of VO-8M until replaced by OC-2s in 1929. The plane was similar to theArmy’s O-2 and was used briefly as utility hacks.

Douglas OD-1

and straight- axle landing gear, but the second prototype,with no spinner and split- axle gear, formed the basis for130 O2U-1 production models ordered in early 1927.

As deliveries proceeded, O2U-1s became the fleet’sstandard floatplane aboard battleships, serving as detach-ments of VO-3B, VO-4B, and VO-5B, and a small number,rigged as landplanes and fitted with arresting gear, servedwith VS-1B aboard Langley. Ten O2U-1 landplanes alsowere assigned to Marine units, six to VO-7M in Nicaraguaand four to VO-9M in Haiti. Thirty- seven O2U-2s com -pleted in 1928 with an 18-inch increase in upper wingspanand factory- installed arresting gear served exclusively inVS units aboard the Navy’s three carriers. The fleet’s grow-ing need for floatplanes generated new orders for 80 O2U-3s and 42 O2U-4s (minor differences in equipment) deliv-ered in 1929 and 1930, which both featured revised tailsurfaces and the larger upper wing of the O2U-2. The

phase- out of O2U floatplanes with newer types beganas early as 1931, but many continued in various utilityroles until the last examples were withdrawn from Navyservice during 1937. Nine ex–Navy O2U-2s allocatedto the Coast Guard in 1934 and 1935 served longer, thelast not being withdrawn until 1941.

Curtiss OC/O2C—1928 see Curtiss F8Cunder FIGHTER AIRCRAFT

Viking OO—1930TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (OO-1)

Type: Four- place general purpose flying boat.Manufacturer: Viking Flying Boat Co. (subsidiary of

Stearman- Varney, Inc.), New Haven, Connecticut.Total produced: 5 (USCG)Powerplant: One 250-hp Wright R-760 Whirlwind 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch wooden propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 104 mph, cruise 88 mph; ceiling15,300 ft.; range 390 mi.


250 sq. ft.

In 1930, after importing three 17HT-4 flying boatsmanufactured in France by Schreck Hydroavions FBA,Viking completed and certified a license- built, WrightJ-6-powered U.S. version as the model V-2. Though ef-forts to market V-2s in the U.S. civil market were gen-erally unsuccessful, the company did sell one of itsSchreck 17HT-4s to the Coast Guard in 1931. While acomparatively outdated biplane design, the small wooden- hulled and framed aircraft nevertheless exhib-ited good open- sea handling qualities needed in CoastGuard operations. After the 17HT-4 was accidentallydestroyed in a fire in 1934, the Coast Guard entered intoa contract with Viking to license- build five examplesunder the new designation OO-1, and all were delivered


The Vought O2U was the first aircraft designed from the ground upas a ship-based floatplane. As deliveries proceeded during 1927, O2U-1s became standard throughout the fleet.

Vought O2U-1

between October and December 1936. Once inservice, the OO-1s operated from stations at Biloxi,Mississippi; Cape May, New Jersey; Charleston,South Carolina; and Miami and St. Petersburg,Florida. Their active career was relatively brief,however, the last example being retired in April1941.

Vought O3U/SU (O4U-2, O5U,and OSU)—1930

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (O3U-3 [SU-4])

Type: Two- place observation floatplane and carrier andlandplane scout.

Manufacturer: Chance Vought Division of United Air-craft, Inc., East Hartford, Connecticut.

Total produced: 328 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: one 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-12

Wasp [600-hp R-1690-42 Hornet] 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch [variable- pitch] metal propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machinegun and two flexible .30-caliber machine guns inthe rear cockpit

Performance: max. speed 156 mph [168 mph] at s.1.; ceil-ing 16,600 ft. [18,600 ft.]; range 650 mi. [680 mi.].

Weights: 2,938 lbs. [3,312 lbs.] empty, 4,451 lbs. [4,765lbs.] loaded.

Dimensions: span 36 ft. 0 in., length 27 ft. 3 in. [27 ft.11 in.], wing area 337 sq. ft.

The O3U-1, ordered by BuAer in January 1930and tested later the same year, was essentially anO2U-4 airframe incorporating several degrees ofsweepback and dihedral to the lower wing. Aftercompletion of official trials, 87 production O3U-1s were delivered to the fleet from mid–1930 tomid–1931, most replacing older O2Us in battleshipdivisions and carrier utility units. In May 1931, oneO3U-1 was used as a testbed for Grumman’s newamphibious float and 15 of the floats were later pro-cured.

Commencing in early 1931, BuAer issued anew requirement directing Vought to split futureO3U production between two types: in addition to Wasp- powered floatplanes, it called for a heaviercarrier and land- based version to be powered by a600-hp Hornet engine encased in a ring cowling.The first Hornet- powered variants, 29 O3U-2s de-livered from late 1931 to early 1932, were placed inservice with VS-1B on Langley and VS-2B on Lex-ington and Marine squadrons VS-14M and VS-15M then stationed aboard Lexington and Saratoga.In 1932 and 1933 Vought produced a further 63 Hornet- powered O3U-4s (differing from -2s insmall details), which entered service with VS-1Bon Langley, VF-2B, VF-5B, VS-3B, and VS-15Mon Lexington, VF-1B, VF-6B, VS-2B, and VS-14M


Viking OO-1

The second OO-1 (V152), but the first to be completed by Viking, as deliveredto the Coast Guard in 1936. An identical French-built Schreck 17HT-4 (V107)had been destroyed in 1934. This type remained in active service until 1941.

on Saratoga, VO-8M in San Diego, and VO-9M in Haiti. WhenBuAer added a new scout designation in 1933, O3U-2s becameSU-1s, 44 O3U-4s became SU-2s, and 20 camera- equippedO3U-4s became SU-3s.

From mid–1932 to mid–1934, Vought manufactured 76 Wasp- powered O3U-3 floatplanes featuring a new, rounded ver-tical tail shape and drag rings, which replaced older aircraft inbattleship and cruiser divisions, and also delivered 20 similar Hornet- powered SU-4s that all entered service with VS-1Baboard Langley. One O3U-4/SU-2 became the sole XO3U-5prototype when modified in mid–1932 to test installation of anR-1535 Twin Wasp Junior engine. The final production variant,the Wasp- powered O3U-6, appeared in early 1935 with an NACA- type cowling and a partial canopy, and 32 weredelivered to the Marines during 1935, being equally split be-tween VO-7M and VO-8M.

In addition to production models, several modified O3Uairframes were tested under different designations: the XO4U-2,flown in June 1932 (not to be confused with the XO4U-1 re-ported below), featured the rounded fin and rudder of the O3U-3, an all- metal wing structure, plus a cowled R-1535 Twin

Wasp Junior engine; the XO5U-1, tested during 1934 and 1935,came with folding wings to be evaluated as a cruiser scout incompetition with the Curtiss XO3C-1 (later SOC) and Doug-las XO2D-1; and the XOSU-1, flown in October 1936, was an


Top: A rare picture of an O3U-1 fitted with a Grumman B-typeamphibious float, probably in 1933. The O3U-1 combined improve-ments of the O2U-4 with sweepback to the upper wing. This replacedolder O2Us in the fleet. Middle: Featuring revised tail group and dragring, 76 O3U-3s joined the fleet between 1932 and 1934. This pictureshows the no. 3 plane at the Naval Academy in 1940. Thirty-five werestill on inventory as of December 1941. Bottom: Hornet-powered SU-2s (initially designated O3U-2s) began equipping carrier units andMarine land-based units in late 1931. This SU-2 was one of sixassigned to VX-4D5 at NAS Anacostia in 1937.

Vought O3U-3

O3U-3 modified to test an experimental system of upper andlower wing flaps. Although the Navy and the Marines beganretiring O3Us and SUs from frontline duties during the late1930s, some 141 of the type were still being employed in a ofvariety training, utility, and reserve roles as of December 1941.

Keystone OK—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XOK-1 FLOATPLANE)

Type: Two- place lightweight observation floatplane.Manufacturer: Keystone Aircraft, Corp. (a subsidiary of Curtiss-

Wright), Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 400-hp Wright R-975C Whirlwind 9-cylinder air-

cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch metal pro-peller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun and oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rear cockpit

Performance: Max. speed 139 mph at s.1.; ceiling 19,900 ft.; range 330mi. (est.).

Weights: 2,219 lbs. empty, 3,395 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 34 ft. 8 in., length 29 ft. 10 in., wing area 293 sq.

ft.

The origins of the OK stemmed from a 1929 BuAer re-quirement calling for a “lightweight” observation floatplanedestined for service aboard Omaha class light cruisers refittedwith catapults. BuAer Design No. 86 specified a single- bay bi-plane, powered by a 400-hp Pratt & Whitney or Wright radialengine, readily convertible to wheels or floats, and light enough(less than 4,000 lbs. loaded) to operate from the CL- type cat-apult. On June 28, 1929, BuAer ordered single prototypes fromboth Keystone and Berliner- Joyce as the XOK-1 and XOJ-1, re-spectively. While these two aircraft were under construction,BuAer authorized Vought to built a third lightweight candidateas the XO4U-1.

Keystone’s XOK-1 prototype, appearing with an all- metal, semi- monocoque fuselage and tail group and an engineenclosed by a drag ring, made its first flight on January 5, 1931.

Initial factory testing in a wheeled configuration resulted in theenlargement of the tail surfaces and replacement of the dragring with an NACA- type cowling. On April 15, 1931, during ademonstration before naval officials, the XOK-1 broke up inflight after the cowling detached itself and smashed into thewings and tailplane. The test pilot managed to get out and para-


The XO5U-1 seen in its original configuration with amphibiousfloat during 1934 VSO trials. It featured folding wings forstowage in cruiser hangars. Curtiss won the competition withthe XO3C-1 (produced as the SOC-1).

Built to a 1929 “lightweight” observation requirement for dutyaboard light cruisers, the XOK-1 competed against similarBerliner-Joyce and Vought prototypes at NAS Anacostia in 1931.

Keystone XOK-1

chute to safety. With the Berliner- Joyce and Vought prototypesnearly ready for trials, BuAer elected to discontinue further de-velopment of the XOK-1.

Berliner- Joyce OJ—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (OJ-2 FLOATPLANE)

Type: Two- place lightweight observation floatplane.Manufacturer: Berliner- Joyce Co., Baltimore, Maryland.Total produced: 40 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 400-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-88 Wasp Junior 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun and oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rear cockpit


Weights: 2,520 lbs. empty, 3,851 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 33 ft. 8 in., length 29 ft. 1 in., wing area 284 sq. ft.

One of the more successful designs of the short- lived Berliner- Joyce Co., BuAer ordered the XOJ-1 on June 28, 1929,to fulfill the same “lightweight” observation floatplane require-ment as the rival Keystone XOK-1 and Vought XO4U-1. While

built to BuAer Design No. 86 like the XOK-1, the XOJ-1differed in having a fabric- covered, metal- framed fuselage andtailplane. After being tested at NAS Anacostia in May 1931(date of first flight not known), the XOJ-1 was returned to thefactory for installation of a full- span “Zap” flap system on theupper and lower wings which was designed to provide morelift with less specific wing area. Following new trials conductedin 1932, BuAer deemed the flap system to be unsatisfactory,but awarded Berliner- Joyce a contract to produce 39 productionaircraft lacking the flap system as the OJ-2.

As OJ-2s reached the fleet during 1933, they began servingin two- plane detachments of VS-5B and VS-6B aboard the tenOmaha class light cruisers that had been retrofitted with cata-pults. One OJ-2 modified in early 1934 with an NACA- typecowling and canopy enclosure was redelivered to NAS Ana-costia for trials as the XOJ-3, but after a crash, was rebuilt andreturned to service as an OJ-2. The active service life of OJ-2swas brief, and the type had been completely replaced by newerCurtiss SOC-1s by mid–1936. After that, 35 OJ-2s continuedto operate with various Navy and Marine reserve units as train-ers until the final examples were scrapped in 1941.


Berliner-Joyce OJ-2

Top: One of 39 OJ-2s delivered in 1933. They served in two-planedetachments aboard Omaha class light cruisers until replacedby Curtiss SOC-1s during 1935 and 1936. Bottom: After beingreplaced aboard light cruisers, most OJ-2s were converted towheels and transferred to reserve units. Final examples with-drawn in 1941.

Vought O4U—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

(XO4U-1 RIGGED WITH WHEELS)

Type: Two- place lightweight observationfloatplane.

Manufacturer: Chance Vought Division ofUnited Aircraft, Inc., East Hartford,Connecticut.

Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 500-hp Pratt & Whitney

R-1340D Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooledradial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Armament: One fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine gun and one flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rear cock-pit.

Performance: Max. speed 143 at s.1.; ceiling21,200 ft.; range 539 mi.


Dimensions: Span 37 ft., length 27 ft. 9 in.,wing area 335 sq. ft.

Ordered in May 1930 as the third type of “lightweight” ob-servation to be considered as a candidate along with the Key-stone XOK-1 and Berliner- Joyce XOJ-1, the Vought XO4U-1was completed to a somewhat different specification. Thedesign was characterized by a deep, metal- clad fuselage, aswept upper wing mated to the top of the fuselage, and arounded tailplane. When the aircraft crashed right after itsmaiden flight on February 28, 1931, BuAer discontinued devel-opment. The XO4U-2 (see above), though flown in June 1932under the same Bureau Number, was actually an O3U-3 air-frame fitted with an R-1535 Twin Wasp Junior engine.

Loening (Keystone) SL—1931

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSL-1)

Type: One- place submarine scout.Manufacturer: Loening Aeronautical Div. of Keystone Aircraft Corp.

(a subsidiary of Curtiss- Wright), East River, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 110-hp Warner Scarab 7-cylinder air- cooled radial

engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 101 mph; ceiling 13,000 ft.; range (not re-

ported).Weights: 1,114 lbs. empty, 1,512 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft., length 27 ft. 2 in., wing area 148 sq. ft.

The Loening SL was the last type of aircraft used in aseries of Navy experiments, conducted intermittently from 1923to 1933, to develop a small seaplane scout that could bedeployed from a submarine. The aircraft had to be designed sothat it could easily be dismantled and stowed in a watertight, eight- foot- diameter tube carried on the deck of the submarine.The earliest experiments had been carried out with diminutive float- equipped biplanes (e.g., Cox- Klemin XS-1 and -2, MartinMS-1) and actual submarine trials conducted in 1926, but thesesmall aircraft were deemed unsatisfactory. Four years later,


Vought XO4U-1

The XO4U-1 seen at Vought’s plant after its first flight in February 1931. Note deep fuselageand shoulder-mounted upper wing. The prototype crashed soon after this picture anddevelopment was discontinued.

BuAer decided to reinstate the idea witha small monoplane flying boat, and in June1930, awarded Loening a contract to con-struct a single prototype as the XSL-1. Thedesign emerged with a semi- cantileveredmonoplane wing which attached to the topof a single- step metal boat hull. TheWarner engine, mounted on struts in apusher configuration, featured a ring cowland a small bullet- shaped nacelle. Stowagein the deck tube was accomplished by sim-ply detaching the wings and stabilizingfloats. The prototype, date of first flightunknown, was delivered to NAS Anacostiafor trials February 1931. When testing re-vealed the XSL-1 to be underpowered withthe Warner engine, it was returned to thefactory for installation of a 160-hp Me -nasco B-6 and a more streamlined enginemount. The revised aircraft, re- designated

XSL-2, resumed testing at Anacostia in early 1933, but thesetrials indicated only a nominal improvement in performance.Soon afterward, the Navy abandoned the entire program whenthe XSL-2 suffered serious damage during exercises with a sub-marine.

Pitcairn OP—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XOP-1)

Type: Two- place observation autogyro.Manufacturer: Pitcairn- Cierva Autogyro Co., Willow Grove, Penn-

sylvania.Total produced: 3 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 300-hp Wright R-975 Whirlwind 9-cylinder air-

cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal pro-peller.

Performance: Max. speed 123 mph; ceiling 16,400 ft.; range (not re-ported).

Weights: 2,250 lbs. empty, 2,807 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Rotor diameter 45 ft. 0 in., length 23 ft. 1 in.


The XSL-1, shown in its original configuration in 1931, was underpowered with theWarner engine. The Navy abandoned the program in 1933 after the modified XSL-2was damaged during exercises with a submarine.

Loening XSL-2

The XOP-1, the first of three Pitcairn PCA-2 autogyros evaluatedby the Navy for the observation role starting in 1931. Landingtrials were conducted aboard Langley in the fall of 1931.

In 1931 the Navy acquired three Pitcairn autogyros for eval-uation purposes under the designation XOP-1. All three wereessentially similar to the civil model PCA-2 having 30-footmonoplane wings with upturned tips and a freewheeling rotormounted on struts. Both the airframe and rotor consisted ofmetal structures covered in fabric. The type commenced officialtrials aboard the Langley in the fall of 1931 but was apparentlynever employed operationally. One XOP-1 was transferred tothe Marines in 1933, where it served with VJ-6M in Nicaraguafor less than a year. Another XOP-1 was re- designated and pre-sumably test flown as the XOP-2 in 1936 when it was modifiedby removing the wings, installing a new 50-foot rotor, andadding a full- chord cowling. All three were withdrawn fromservice sometime in 1937.

Douglas O-38—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (O-38C)

Type: Two place observation landplane.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Corp., Santa Monica, California.Total produced : 1 (USCG)Powerplant: One 525-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690-7 Hornet 9-cylinder


Pitcairn XOP-1

Douglas O-38C

The single Douglas O-38C, a standard Army observation type,purchased by the Coast Guard in 1931, apparently for trainingpurposes.It was withdrawn in 1934 after being damaged beyondrepair.



Weights: 3,050 lbs. empty, 4,350 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 40 ft., length 31 ft. 3 In., wing area 371 sq. ft. (est.).

The Douglas O-38, a standard Army observation type pro-duced in several variants between 1931 and 1934, served withAir Corps and the National Guard until 1941. One unarmed ex-ample, originally procured in 1931 under an Army contract anO-38B, was fitted with dual controls and assigned to the CoastGuard the same year as the O-38C. The aircraft operated undercall number V108 until mid–1934, when it was damaged beyondrepair in an accident.

Bellanca SE—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSE-2)

Type: Three- place long- range scout.Manufacturer: Bellanca Aircraft Corp., New Castle, Delaware.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 650-hp Wright R-1510-98 Twin Whirlwind 14-cylinder


Armament: Two fixed forward- firing .30-cal. machine guns and oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rear cockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 173 mph at s.1.; ceiling 18,800 ft.; range1,455 mi.


The XSE-1 was ordered by BuAer on October 19, 1931, tobe evaluated as a carrier or land- based long- range scout. Itsdesign concept, similar to Bellanca’s P-200 Airbus, was char-acterized by a high- wing that utilized large, airfoil- shaped liftand landing gear struts as auxiliary wing surfaces. To fulfillBuAer requirements for carrier stowage, the wings and liftstruts were hinged to fold rearward along the fuselage. In itsoriginal configuration, the prototype was powered by a 650-hpWright R-1820 Cyclone F and mounted an arrester hookforward of the tailwheel. The XSE-1 commenced initial factory flight- testing in December 1932 but was destroyed in a crashbefore it could be delivered to the Navy for scheduled trials.The second prototype, designated XSE-2, emerged in late 1934with a twin- row Wright R-1510 engine, plus a redesigned rearfuselage, enlarged vertical tail surfaces, and a stronger tail hookpositioned aft of the tailwheel. By this time, however, BuAerwas making plans to procure a new generation of bomber (B)and scout bomber (SB) types to fulfill the scouting role (e.g.,BG, SBU, and SBC) and Bellanca’s contract was terminated.

Loening (Keystone) O2L—1932

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XO2L-1)

Type: Three- place observation/utility amphibian.Manufacturer: Loening Aeronautical Div. of Keystone Aircraft Corp.

(a subsidiary of Curtiss- Wright), East River, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-4 Wasp 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a three- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropeller.

Performance: Max. speed 132 mph, cruise 110 mph; ceiling 16,200 ft.;range 350 mi.

Weights: 2,742 lbs. empty, 4,053 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 37 ft. 0 in., length 29 ft. 10 in., wing area 348 sq.

ft.

The O2L represented the ultimate evolution of the designseries that had begun in 1925 with the Liberty- powered OL-1.


Bellanca XSE-2

The modified second prototype, the XSE-2, running up at Ana-costia in 1934. The airfoil-shaped lift strut was characteristic ofBellanca’s high-wing designs. No production was ordered.

In 1931, while deliveries of the OL-9 were still underway, Loen-ing received a contract to design and build a substantially

revised prototype under the designation XO2L-1. Though shar-ing many similarities with the OL-9, including the Wasp pow-erplant, the XO2L-1 made extensive use of semi- monocoqueconstruction techniques that improved streamlining of the fuse-lage and main pontoon; and a 30-percent decrease in weightallowed smaller wings supported by a single bay of struts. Di-rectional stability problems encountered soon after the proto-type’s first flight in early 1932 led to the addition of finlets onthe horizontal stabilizers. But when performance and handlingstill fell below Navy expectations, the prototype was returnedto the factory and subjected to modifications which includedinstallation of a 550-hp R-1340D engine, lengthening the fuse-lage and pontoon three and a half feet, and enlarging the finand rudder. Under the new designation XO2L-2, trials con -tinued into late 1932, but Navy officials judged that the smallperformance improvement over the OL-9 did not merit produc-tion. BuAer then turned to Grumman for a new amphibian, ul-timately resulting in the creation of JF/J2F Duck series.

Curtiss S2C—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XS2C-1)

Type: Two- place landplane scout.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Division, Buf-

falo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)


Loening XO2L-2

The sole prototype at NAS Anacostia in 1932, re-designatedXO2L-2 after installation of a larger fin and rudder. The planewas fleet tested aboard battleships with VO-1B but not placed inproduction.

Curtiss XS2C-1

Powerplant: One 650-hp Wright R-1510-28 Twin Whirlwind 14-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a three- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropeller.

Armament: Four fixed .30-cal. machine guns, one flexible .30-cal. rearmachine gun, and up to 464 lbs. of bombs carried on externalracks.

Performance: Max. speed 186 mph at s.1.; ceiling 18,900 ft.; range 640mi. (combat).


The XS2C-1 came as a direct development of the CurtissYA-10, which itself was a radialengine offshoot of the Army’s inline- powered A-8 Shrike of 1931. After specifying deliverywith a Wright R-1510 twin- row engine, BuAer purchased theXS2C-1 from Curtiss in December 1932, apparently not for as-sessment as a potential operational aircraft, but to test and eval-uate the type’s innovative slot and flap system. In any case, theXS2C-1 was not suited for carriers operations due to the sizeof its non- folding, wire- braced wings and absence of arrestinggear. The aircraft is known to have been tested at Anacostiaduring 1933, but its ultimate disposition was not reported.

Curtiss S3C (F10C)—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XS3C-1)

Type: Two- place carrier scout.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Division, Buf-

falo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 620-hp Wright R-1820-E Cyclone 9-cylinder air-


Armament: Two fixed .30-cal. machine guns, one flexible .30-cal. ma-chine in the rear, an up to 500 lbs. of bombs carried on externalracks.



Initially designated XF10C-1, the Curtiss XS3C-1 was ba-sically an O2C-2 (see above) airframe which had been adaptedto a new low- drag, cantilevered landing gear arrangement and


A radial-engine derivative of the Army A-8, the XS2C-1 wastested in 1932 and 1933 to evaluate its innovative slot and flapsystem. It was never equipped with arresting gear.

Curtiss XS3C-1

Basically an improved O2C-1, the only prototype of the S3C,shown here at Anacostia in early 1932, was destroyed only weekslater when it lost its elevators during dive testing.

a reshaped fin and rudder. It flew from the Buffalofactory for the first time on January 29, 1932, thenwas delivered to NAS Anacostia for trials in earlyFebruary. But only several weeks later, the XS3C-1 project came to an abrupt end when the sole ex-ample was destroyed after shedding its elevatorsin a dive.

Great Lakes SG—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSG-1)

Type: Two- place amphibian scout.Manufacturer: Great Lakes Aircraft Corp., Cleveland,

Ohio.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 400-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-38 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, groundadjustable metal propeller.

Armament (proposed): One flexible .30-caliber machinegun in the observer’s position.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph; ceiling 8,400 ft.;range 695 mi.


347 sq. ft.

The Great Lakes XSG-1 was one of three aircraft (seeLoening XS2L-1 and Sikorsky XSS-2) ordered by the Navyand tested during 1932 and 1933 as part an ultimately unsuc-cessful effort to find a scout amphibian as a replacement forthe conventional floatplanes then serving aboard cruisers. TheBuAer specification called for a single- engine amphibianstressed for catapult launches that, with wings folded, wouldbe small enough to fit into the hangar space aboard Navy cruis-ers. The Great Lakes entry, designated the XSG-1, was deliveredto Naval Air Station Anacostia for trials in November 1932. Itsdesign presented a curious two- story layout: two- bays ofbiplane wings resting on a main pontoon, with the engine andpilot being situated in a separate nacelle between the upper andlower wings. The gunner/observer’s position was located downin the pontoon aft of the wings. When, following brief trials,the XSG-1 failed to meet BuAer’s performance expectations,further development was cancelled.

Loening (Keystone) S2L—1933TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XS2L-1)

Type: Two- place amphibian scout.Manufacturer: Loening Aeronautical Div. of Keystone Aircraft Corp.

(a subsidiary of Curtiss- Wright), East River, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 400-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-28 Wasp Junior 9-


Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the observer’s po-sition.

Performance: Max. speed 130 mph; ceiling 12,400 ft.; range 633 mi.Weights: 2,833 lbs. empty, 4,317 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 34 ft. 6 in., length 30 ft. 7 in., wing area 355 sq. ft.


Great Lakes XSG-1

The sole prototype XSG-1, probably off the Maryland coast near NAS Anacostiain 1933. Its unusual configuration is evident in this side view. The Navy even-tually abandoned the idea of an amphibious cruiser scout.

The Loening XS2L-1 was the second of three amphibiandesigns (see Great Lakes XSG-1 and Sikorsky XSS-1) to beconsidered as possible replacements for conventional float -planes aboard Navy cruisers. The Navy had previously exper-imented with the idea of adding fully amphibious floats to ex-isting observation types, but the resulting weight penalty haddegraded performance unacceptably. A designed- for- purposeamphibian, however, was viewed as a potentially better solutionto the current problem of periodically re- rigging floatplanes towheeled undercarriage, then back to floats again. After re -ceiving a contract in 1932 to construct a single amphibian pro-totype, Loening proceeded to conceive a conventional biplanedesign that appeared to derive features from both its Navy OL-9and the civilian K-85 Air Yacht. A rather odd- looking cockpitarea resulted from glazed panels being placed around the in-terplane struts below the engine and wing center- section. Bythe time the XS2L-1 arrived at NAS Anacostia for official trialsin February 1933, the Great Lakes entry had already beengraded as unsatisfactory. Although the aircraft exhibited mar-ginally better performance than its rival, it still did not comparefavorably with existing cruiser- based floatplanes like the VoughtO3U-3 and Berliner- Joyce OJ-2, and no production resulted.

Sikorsky SS—1933

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSS-2)

Type: Two- place amphibian scout.Manufacturer: Sikorsky Div. of United Aircraft Corp., Bridgeport,

Connecticut.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-12 Wasp 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, ground- adjustablemetal propeller.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the observer’s po-sition.

Performance: Max. speed 159 mph; ceiling 22,600 ft.; range 618 mi.Weights: 3,274 lbs. empty, 4,790 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 42 ft., length 33 ft. 1/2 in., wing area 285 sq. ft.

The Sikorsky XSS-2 appeared as the last of three amphib-ian designs (see Great Lakes XSG-1 and Loening XS2L-1) tobe considered as possible replacements for conventional float-planes aboard Navy cruisers. In addition to adequate scoutingrange, the requirement specified that the aircraft be stressed forcatapult launches and small enough, with wings folded, to fitwithin the confines of existing cruiser hangars (i.e., a width of14 feet, 6 inches). Compared to his rivals, Sikorsky emergedwith a remarkably modern aeronautical concept: a very stream-lined two- step hull of all- metal semi- monocoque constructionwith monoplane wings that were raised above the spray in agull configuration. The single Wasp engine, contained in a clean cowling- nacelle combination, was strut- mounted between theV of the wings. In stowed position, the wings folded back fromthe gull break to rest against the tail fin. The aircraft employeda Grumman- type amphibious landing gear and per specifica -tion, came with a tailhook to permit arrested landings aboardcarriers. Sikorsky delivered the XSS-1 prototype to Anacostia


Loening XS2L-1

The XS2L-1 prototype was part of an unsuccessful experimentto replace floatplanes aboard Navy cruisers with boat-hulledamphibian. Development discontinued in 1933.

sometime in 1933, and following modifications, was subse-quently evaluated as the XSS-2. Though its range was similarto the XSG-1 and XS2L-1, the XSS-2 demonstrated itself to be50 mph faster with a much better rate- of- climb. In the interval,however, the Navy had decided to abandon the small flyingboat idea in favor of new types of cruiser- based floatplanes,and thus no production of the XSS-2 was ordered.

Pennsylvania Aircraft SyndicateOZ—1934

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XOZ-1)

Type: Two- place observation autogyro.Manufacturer: Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate Ltd., Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 155-hp Kinner R-490 (R-5) 5-cylinder air- cooled ra-

dial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 107 mph; ceiling (not reported); range 150

mi.


Sikorsky XSS-2

The XSS-2 was the last of the three amphibious cruiser scoutsevaluated by the Navy in 1932 and 1933 and the only monoplane.All were ultimately deemed unsatisfactory.

Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate

XOZ-1

Weights: 1,455 lbs. empty, 1,985 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Rotor diameter 32 ft., length 21 ft. 4 in.

Constructed to BuAer specifications in 1934 from the fuse-lage, lower wings, and tail group of a Consolidated N2Y-1trainer, the XOZ-1 was the second autogyro to be designed byE. Burke Wilford. Unlike the Pitcairn- Cieva arrangement (seePitcairn OP), where the blades were hinged to the rotor headat a fixed pitch angle, the Wilford system used rigid rotors thatautomatically adjusted their pitch angle in response to changesin angle- of- attack. Little is known about the XOZ-1 other thanthe fact that Navy conducted tests with it during 1934 in botha wheeled and twin float configuration.

Curtiss SOC (O3C, SO2C, and SON)Seagull—1934

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SOC-3)

Type: Two- place scout- observation (VSO) floatplane.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Division, Buf-

falo, New York; Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-vania.

Total produced: 309 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-22 Wasp 9-cylinder


Armament: One fixed .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .30-cal. ma-chine gun in the observer’s position, and up to 650 lbs. of bombscarried on external racks.

Performance: Max. speed 164 mph ar s.1.; ceiling 14,400 ft.; range1,025 mi.


Beginning in the early 1930s, BuAer reclassified cruiserand battleship- based floatplanes into two distinct types: heavier- than- air scout- observation (VSO) for cruisers and heavier- than- air observation- scout (VOS) for battleships. VSO types, scout-

ing ahead of the cruiser screen, needed more range and the abil-ity to communicate from longer distances; and for maintenance

and protection in rough seas, they also needed to fitwithin the confines of existing cruiser hangars (i.e.,length varied but a width of 14 feet, 6 inches was stan-dard). Requirements for new VSO types were circu-lated in mid–1933 to Curtiss, Douglas, and Vought,with the expectation that prototypes would be deliv-ered for trials in early 1934. In addition to biplanefolding wings and performance factors, the specifi-cation called for each prototype to be equipped withan R-1340 Wasp powerplant and an amphibious centerfloat. The Curtiss prototype, designated XO3C-1,made its first flight from the Buffalo plant on March 5,1934 and was delivered to NAS Anacostia for officialtesting shortly thereafter. Though retaining open cock-pits for the pilot and observer, the XO3C-1 featured ahighly innovative system of full- span flaps on theupper wings and automatic leading- edge slats thatkept takeoff and landing speeds within the required


A very rare photograph of the float-equipped XOZ-1 autogyro in 1934. Wil-ford rotor system was adapted to fuselage, lower wing, and tail group ofConsolidated N2Y-1.

Curtiss SOC-1

60 mph range. Competitive trials between the XO3C-1, theDouglas XO2D-1, and the Vought XO5U-1 started in June 1934,but while still in progress, BuAer abandoned the notion of am-phibious floats after deciding that the extra weight imposed by

the landing gear reduced performance to an unacceptableextent, and ordered all three prototypes to be refitted with con-ventional pontoons.

In March 1935, once VSO trials had ended, Curtiss wasdeclared the winner and given a contract for 135 pro-duction aircraft under the new scout- observation desig-nation SOC-1, and at some point the factory name“Seagull” was applied. Notably, this was the Navy’s sin-gle largest floatplane order since the O2U-1 of 1926, andthough no comparative cost data was reported, the per-formance between the three prototypes was so similarthat unit price must have been an important factor. SOC-1 production models, which began reaching the fleet inlate 1935, differed from the prototype in having a re-designed cowling with moveable flaps and a full canopyenclosure ending in a raised turtledeck behind thecockpit area. As deliveries continued, SOC-1s were as-signed to VS-5S, -6B, -9S, -10S, and -12S in detachmentsassigned to various cruisers within the fleet.

While nearly identical to the SOC-1, the 40 SOC-2s produced in late 1936 came with wheeled undercar-riage only (though some were later reportedly adaptedto floats). The XSO2C-1, an experimental variationtested in early 1937, featured a five- foot fuselage exten-sion and flaps on the lower wings, but production wasdeclined in favor of 83 SOC-3s ordered in May, whichdiffered from previous SOCs in having interchangeablewheel and float undercarriage and were the first of thetype to be assigned to battleships. The last four Curtiss- built examples, four SOC-4s (identical to SOC-3s), weredelivered to the Coast Guard in early 1938. Twelve SOC-3s were delivered to Marine squadron VMS-2 during1939 and 1940. SOC-2s and -3s subsequently retrofittedwith carrier arresting gear were re- designated SOC-2Aand -3A, respectively. Apparently due to productionscheduling priorities at Curtiss, a further 44 SOC-3swere license- built by the Naval Aircraft Factory betweenlate 1938 and mid–1939 and accepted into service as theSON-1. Over 250 SOCs/SONs were still on the activenaval inventory as of December 1941, and many remainedin service until the conclusion of hostilities in 1945.

Douglas O2D—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XO2D-1)

Type: Two- place scout- observation (VSO) floatplane.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, Califor-

nia.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-12 Wasp 9-


Armament: One fixed .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .30-cal. machine gun in the observer’s position, and up to 650lbs. of bombs carried on external racks.

Performance: Max. speed 162 mph at s.1.; ceiling 14,300 ft.;range 798 mi.


Top: The first floatplane built to new VSO requirement, the prototypeXO3C-1 seen in 1934 with original amphibious main float. The weight ofthe gear mechanism was ultimately judged to unacceptably limit per-formance. Middle: The Cincinnati Detachment SOC-1 of VCS-3 is seenin 1938. While a ship was in port, its scout aircraft would often be con-verted to wheels for shore operations. Bottom: One of three SOC-4sacquired by the Coast Guard in 1938. The -4 was essentially identical tothe SOC-3 except for different equipment carried.


Ordered by BuAer in June 1933, the Douglas XO2D-1 wasone of three prototypes built in response to the Navy’s VSO (heavier- than- air scout- observation) requirement. The specifi-cation was aimed at finding one type of aircraft to replaceVought O2Us and O3Us then serving aboard heavy cruisersand Berliner- Joyce OJs on light cruisers. After initial factorytesting in early 1934, the XO2D-1 was delivered to NAS Ana-costia in March 1934 just a few weeks before the rival CurtissXO3C-1. Compared to the XO3C-1, the XO2D-1 was marginallylighter and came with a fully enclosed cockpit and a conven-tional trailing edge flap system on the upper wing. The official fly- off between competing prototypes commenced with the ar-rival of the Vought XO5U-1 (see Vought O3U, above, for moredetails) in June 1934.

Per specifications, the VSO types were initially equippedwith amphibious center floats, but after deducing that theweight of the landing gear imposed serious limitations on range,BuAer ordered all three prototypes to be refitted with conven-tional pontoons. In March 1935, despite a very close competi-tion, BuAer announced Curtiss as the winner and ordered itsprototype into production as the SOC-1. After only 86 hours offlying time, the XO2D-1 was stripped of its engine and equip-ment and sent to the Naval Aircraft Factory for static structuraltests.

Bellanca SOE—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSOE-1)

Type: Two- place scout- observation (VSO) floatplane.Manufacturer: Bellanca Aircraft Corp., New Castle, Delaware.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 725-hp Wright R-1820-84 Cyclone 9-cylinder air-

cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metalpropeller.

Armament: none installed.Performance: Max. speed 176 mph at s.1.; ceiling 21,400 ft.; range

1,104 mi.Weights: 4,508 lbs. empty, 6,552 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 41 ft., length 34 ft. 7 in., wing area 398 sq. ft.

In October 1934, while the VSO fly- off between theXO3C-1, XO2D-1, and XO5U-1 (see above) was ongoing,BuAer ordered two larger cruiser scouts, the Bellanca XSOE-1 and the Fairchild XSOK-1 (prototype cancelled prior to com-pletion). The specification was broad, calling for a non- amphibious, folding- wing seaplane having an empty weight ofnot more than 3,800 lbs. Bellanca evolved a sesquiplaneconcept characterized by gulled upper wings that blended intoa long- greenhouse canopy and a very broad center float joinedto the fuselage with a streamlined fairing in lieu of struts. Thedesign employed trailing edge flaps on both upper and lowerwings to keep takeoff and landing speeds within acceptablelimits. Construction of the XSOE-1 was somewhat protracted,however, and when finally rolled out for factory flight testingin March 1936, its completed weight exceeded design


Douglas XO2D-1

Built to the 1933 VSO requirement, the XO2D-1 appeared withan amphibious main float. After the SOC-1 was selected for pro-duction, this aircraft was sent to the Naval Aircraft Factory forstatic structural tests.

limitations by a factor of 20 percent, leading Navy officials todetermine that catapult speeds would be unacceptably high.The prototype was delivered to NAS Philadelphia in Augustbut was eventually dismantled without ever having been flown.

Vought OS2U Kingfisher—1938TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (OS2U-1)

Type: Two- place observation- scout (VOS) floatplane.Manufacturer: Chance Vought Division of United Aircraft, Inc., Strat-

ford, Connecticut.Total produced: 1,518 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-48 Wasp Junior 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Armament: One fixed .30-cal. machine gun and one flexible .30-cal.machine gun in the rear cockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 175 mph at 5,500 ft.; ceiling 19,000 ft.; range1,015 mi.


In 1936, out of a mutual desire to replace the Navy’s agingfleet of O3Us and equip two new battleships planned (1936 pro-


The XSOE-1 prototype as delivered to NAS Philadelphia inAugust 1936. It exceeded specified catapult weigh by 20 percentand was dismantled without ever having been flown by the Navy.

Bellanca XSOE-1

Vought OS2U-1

gram), BuAer announced a new VOS (heavier- than- air observation- scout) requirement calling for a floatplane, readilyconvertible to wheel undercarriage, that would be small enoughto operate from battleships without need of folding wings. Ini-tially, in May 1936, two biplane ideas were authorized: a VoughtO3U-3 refitted with an experimental flap system as the XOSU-1 and a new design from the Naval Aircraft Factory as theXOSN-1. Whether the XOSU-1, tested in late 1936, representeda bona fide candidate is not clear, but its performance, in anyevent, was apparently deemed to offer too little advantage overthe O3U-3. In early 1937, with the goal of making a productiondecision by late 1938 or early 1939, BuAer ordered two moreVOS prototypes, the biplane XOSS-1 from Stearman and themonoplane XOS2U-1 from Vought.

Vought’s XOS2U-1 completed its first flight with wheelson March 1, 1938, and with floats on May 19, arriving at NASAnacostia midsummer, and all three prototypes were ready tocommence a competitive fly- off by the fall of 1938. Whereas

the XOSN-1 and XOSS-1 biplanes both showed incrementalimprovements over the O3U series, the XOS2U-1 establisheda new state- of- the- art in floatplane design. With 30 percent lesswing area, 25 percent less horsepower, and 15 percent less grossweight, Rex Beisel’s pioneering concept out- performed thecompetition in every category of flight—speed, ceiling, andrange—while posting a similar landing speed (56 mph). TheXOS2U-1’s wide operating speeds were made possible by uti-lizing a broad- chord wing design that incorporated large, full- span flaps for slow flight and spoilers for roll control. It wasalso the first American military aircraft to employ spot- weldingin its primary airframe structures. During evaluations, a thirdcenterline strut was added on the pontoon afterbody for extrabracing and a small step incorporated in the wing floats.

In May 1939, after less than a year of official evaluations,Vought received a contract for 54 production OS2U-1s, whichall entered service with the fleet between May and Novemberof 1940. Departing from the Corsair tradition, Vought named

the new type “Kingfisher.” BuAerplaced a new order in December1939 for 158 improved OS2U-2shaving armor protection, self- sealing tanks, and the newer R-985-50 engine. As deliveries proceededinto 1940 and 1941, 45 OS2U-2swere completed as floatplanes and113 as landplanes accompanied by 70extra sets of Edo floats. Many of theKingfisher land planes went to shorestations where they equipped theNavy’s new Inshore Patrol squad -rons. Starting in July 1941, the firstof 1,006 OS2U-3s, identical to the -2 except for an R-985-AN2 engine,began rolling off Vought’s assemblylines. By December 1941, some 446OS2U-1s, -2s, and -3s were active inship and shore stations, with another90 awaiting assignment in the fleet.In order to relieve the wartime de-mand on Vought’s plant capacity, afurther 300 OS2U-3s were manufac-tured by the Naval Aircraft Factorybetween May and October of 1942as the OS2N-1. OS2Us/OS2Ns re-mained in frontline service untilthey began to be replaced by CurtissSC-1s in mid–1944.


Top: The XOS2U-1, seen during acceptance trials in 1938, represented a quantum leap infloatplane design. Innovations included full-span flaps with spoilers for roll control and spot-welded airframe assembles. Bottom: An OS2U-1 rigged with wheels seen in 1941 while servingin the VO detachment aboard Mississippi (BB-41). By the end of the year, all Battleship VOShad replaced their SOCs with OS2Us.

Naval Aircraft Factory OSN—1938TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XOSN-1)

Type: Two- place observation- scout (VOS) floatplane.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-36 Wasp 9-cylinder



Performance: Max. speed 160 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling 14,900 ft.; range925 mi.


Authorized on May 11, 1936, the Naval Aircraft FactoryXOSN-1 was the first all- new aircraft design to be ordered underthe Navy’s new VOS (heavier- than- air observation- scout) re-quirement. As with existing battleship- based floatplanes, theVOS type’s primary role would be spotting for the big gunsrather than long- range scouting. Design and construction ofthe XOSN-1 proceeded over the next two years, the prototype

being delivered to NAS Anacostia for official trials in May1938. Though of biplane design, the XOSN-1 featured such in-novations as an all- metal airframe clad entirely in aluminum,large, automatic slats on the upper wing, and an I- strut bracingsystem that eliminated the need for interplane bracing wires.In December 1939, after Vought’s XOS2U-1 had been slatedfor production as the winning VOS candidate, the XOSN-1 wasassigned to the Naval Academy at Annapolis where it was usedas a trainer as part of VD-8D5 until finally stricken in mid–1944.

Stearman OSS—1938

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XOSS-1)

Type: Two- place observation- scout (VOS) floatplane.Manufacturer: Stearman Aircraft Div., Boeing Airplane Co., Wichita,

Kansas.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 550-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-36 Wasp 9-cylinder



Performance: Max. speed 162 mph at 6,000 ft.; ceiling 16,600 ft.; range986 mi.

Weights: 3,826 lbs. empty, 5,612 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 36 ft., length 34 ft. 7 in., wing area 378 sq. ft.

Ordered by BuAer on May 6, 1937, Stearman’s XOSS-1,along with the Naval Aircraft Factory XOSN-1 and VoughtXOS2U-1, was one of three prototypes to be considered in theNavy’s quest to find a new VSO (heavier- than- air observation- scout) type for duty aboard battleships. When delivered to NASAnacostia for trials in July 1938, Stearman’s entry appeared asan all- metal biplane having fabric covered wings and controlsurfaces which, for slow flight, used Junkers- type trailing- edgeflaps that ran the full span of the upper wing. A year later, after


NAF XOSN-1

The XOSN-1 prototype competed against the XOSS-1 andXOS2U-1 in 1938. Though having advanced features for abiplane, its performance did not match the more innovativeXOS2U-1.

the XOS2U-1 had been declared winner of the VSOcompetition, the XOSS-1 was sent to the Naval Aircraft Factoryin Philadelphia, where, as part of VX-3D4, it was used to per-form various tests until July 1941, at which point it was scrappedafter having flown a total of 396 hours.

Vought SO2U—1939TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XSO2U-1)

Type: Two- place scout- observation (VSO) floatplane.Manufacturer: Chance Vought Division of United Aircraft, Inc., Strat-

ford, Connecticut.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 500-hp Ranger XV-770-4 12-cylinder air- cooled

inline engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.Armament: One fixed .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .30-cal. ma-

chine gun in the rear cockpit, and up 650 lbs. of bombs or depthcharges carried on wing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 190 mph at 9,000 ft.; ceiling 22,200 ft.;range 984 mi.



StearmanXOSS-1

The XOSS-1 as delivered to NAS Anacostia for testing in mid–1938. Note Junkers-type flaps on upper wing. While moreadvanced than the O3U, it could not match the performanceparameters of the XOS2U.

Vought XSO2U-1

In an effort analogous to the VOS competition, the Navyhoped to obtain a more modern VSO floatplane that wouldeventually replace the SOC biplanes serving the cruiser divi-sions. Thus, in 1937 BuAer issued a new requirement callingfor a monoplane designed around the experimental Ranger XV-770-4, inverted V-12 powerplant being developed especially forthe Navy. Detailed specifications listed a wingspan of 38 feetthat folded to a width of 14-feet, six- inches to permit stowagein cruiser hangars, a maximum catapult weight of 6,350 lbs., a56 mph landing speed, provision for long- range radio equip-ment, widely spaced pilot and observer position for optimalvisibility, and an airframe stressed to 7.5-Gs for dive- bombing.In the late spring of 1938, after considering design proposals,BuAer awarded contracts to construct single prototypes to Cur-tiss and Vought, respectively as the XSO3C-1 and XSO2U-1.

Resembling a longer, more streamlined Kingfisher,Vought’s XSO2U-1 made its first flight with wheels in July 1939and with floats later in the year. It arrived at NAS Anacostiafor trials in February 1940, just weeks after the XSO3C-1. Eventhough both prototypes were very similar in appearance due tothe precise nature of the specifications, the XSO2U-1 exhibitedslightly better performance and better overall stability than itsCurtiss counterpart. However, by mid–1940, Vought’s Stratfordfacilities were already at capacity with the OS2U and plannedproduction of the F4U-1 and as a result, the XSO3C-1 was se-lected for production. The sole XSO2U-1 was transferred tothe Ranger Engine Corp. in Farmingdale, New York, and servedthere as an engine testbed until stricken from the Navyinventory in 1944.

Curtiss SO3C Seagull(Seamew)—1939

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SO3C-2)

Type: Two- place scout- observation (VSO) floatplane.Manufacturer: Curtiss- Wright Corp., Curtiss Aeroplane Division, Buf-

falo, New York.

Total produced: 801 (USN, USCG)Powerplant: One 530-hp Ranger V-770-8 12-cylinder air- cooled inline

engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.Armament: One fixed .30-cal. machine gun, one flexible .50-cal. ma-

chine gun in the rear cockpit, and up 650 lbs. of bombs or depthcharges carried on wing racks.



In 1937 BuAer circulated a new VSO requirement with theaim of finding a new cruiser- based scout that would incorporatethe aerodynamic advances recently seen in Vought’s XOS2U-1, and it is not surprising that construction of prototypes wasnarrowed in May 1938 to the two airframe contractors havingthe most up- to- date experience with ship- based floatplanes.Both entries, the Curtiss XSO3C-1 and the Vought XSO2U-1,were to be monoplanes built to very detailed specifications gov-erning size (with wings folded), weight, performance, arma-ment, and cockpit arrangement. In a parallel project, RangerEngine Corp. was developing an inverted V-12 inline, air- cooledengine that would power both.


The Vought monoplane VSO contender, the XSO2U-1, was deliv-ered to NAS Anacsotia in early 1940. Vought by that time lackedthe plant capacity to put another type of aircraft into produc-tion.

Curtiss XSO3C-1

Although the completed prototypes emerged with a similarappearance, Vought’s XSO2U-1 borrowed many elements ofits proven OS2U design, while Curtiss was forced to developthe XSO3C-1 almost from scratch. Curtiss employed a moreconservative wing layout, using a conventional aileron and trailing- edge flap arrangement, with only a few degrees of di-hedral. The tail group was located slightly above the thrust line.But soon after the XSO3C-1 made it first flight on October 6,1939, the aircraft exhibited serious control problems with regardto roll and yaw stability. Curtiss attempted to remedy the defectsby adding upturned endplates on the wingtips to compensatefor insufficient dihedral and increasing vertical fin area througha long fillet that extended over the observer’s cockpit. Compli-cating matters further, BuAer was by mid–1940 moving to awartime procurement schedule that effectively ruled out pro-duction of a new aircraft type by Vought. In October 1940, asa consequence, Curtiss received a production contract for 300aircraft as the SO3C-1. In addition to the aerodynamic changes,production models featured a deepened engine cowling to per-mit better cooling, a V-770-6 engine rated at 530-hp, plus armorplating and self- sealing fuel tanks. Rear armament wasupgraded to a 50-cal. machine gun.

Service trials of the first production SO3C-1s during thespring of 1942 revealed that the type was too underpowered tooperate from cruisers, causing them to be replaced with eitherOS2Us or SOCs. After 141 SO3C-1s had been completed inmid–1942, they were superceded on the production line by 150SO3C-2s, which came with a centerline bomb rack andarresting gear and were intended mainly for wheeled operationsfrom escort carriers. These were followed, starting in December1942, by 309 SO3C-2Cs, with 650-hp V-770-8 engines, 24-voltelectrical systems, and upgraded radios, 250 of which were de-livered to Great Britain as the Seamew. Although the type’s U.S.Navy name was officially Seagull, it is most commonly referredto as the Seamew. The 200 SO3C-3s produced between June1943 and January 1944 lacked arresting gear and were used astrainers and target drones. Forty- five SO3C-3 landplanes wereassigned to the Coast Guard in 1943 for coastal patrol. Plans

for Ryan to produce the aircraft under license as the SOR-1were cancelled.

PATROL AIRCRAFT

Synopsis of Patrol Aircraft Procurement

Patrol aircraft, all single or twin- engine biplane flyingboats, were the most numerous type of combat aircraft in theNavy’s inventory at the close of World War I. Flying boats, dueto their superior range and ability to operate from distant shorebases, were ideally suited to maritime patrol and recon nais -sance, which included offensive bombing attacks against hostilesubmarines. Wartime contracts, with deliveries continuing into1919, accounted for acceptance of 350 Curtiss H-16s, 1,100 Cur-tiss HS-1s and -2s, and 227 Naval Aircraft Factory (NAF) F-5s, many of which continued to serve up through the late 1920s.During the first decade after the war, NAF functioned as a clearing- house for many patrol boat developments, testing newdesigns such as the PN-7, -8, -9, 10, and -12, and from 1927 to1929, BuAer initiated the largest postwar flying boat order whenit awarded contracts to Douglas, Hall, Martin, and Keystone tobuild 122 aircraft based upon NAF’s PN-12 design.

From the late 1920s onward, the Navy’s desire to maintainits reach in two oceans kept patrol boat procurement at the fore-front. At the same time, budgetary constraints on spending, im-posed by the onset of the Depression, caused BuAer to shiftemphasis on design and development from government- sponsored NAF programs to private contractors. In 1928, BuAerembarked upon a program to procure the Navy’s firstmonoplane patrol boat, awarding the initial development con-tract to Consolidated for the PY, but as a result of a competitivebidding process, gave Martin a contract in 1929 to produce tennearly identical examples as the P2M and P3M. In 1931, whenBuAer solicited bids for an extensive redesign of the PY, Con-solidated landed a production contract this time for 47 P2Ysthat were delivered from 1933 to 1935. Experiments conductedin 1932 and 1933 with the smaller Sikorsky XP2S and largerHall XP2H patrol boat prototypes did not yield any new pro-duction contracts, however, officials at BuAer were hard at workon a plan to replace all of the Navy’s older biplane patrol boatforce with a modern monoplane having improved range andsuperior offensive capabilities. Development contacts were is-sued in 1934 for the Douglas XP3D and Consolidated XP3Ywhich, followed by trials between both prototypes during 1935,culminated in a production order being awarded toConsolidated for 60 aircraft that began entering service in 1936as the PBY-1, the change in designation denoting a new navalemphasis on the “patrol bomber” (PB) aspect of the aircraft’soverall mission. This initial contract was followed over the nextfive years by a succession of new PBY orders: 50 PBY-2s and66 PBY-3s delivered in 1937 and 1938, 33 PBY-4s in 1938 and1939, and 164 PBY-5s and 33 PBY-5As (amphibious) by theend of 1941.


The XSO3C-1 prototype as delivered in late 1939. Curtissreceived the production contract because of Vought’s backlog onother aircraft. This type was ultimately deemed unsuited forcruiser operations.

BuAer’s quest for new patrol boats during the mid– andlate 1930s did not stop with procurement of PBYs but encom-passed even bolder plans to acquire different twin- engine types,plus a four- engine concept that would bring forth several of thelargest military flying boats ever built in the U.S. The HallXPTBH provides an interesting example of an ultimately un-successful twin- engine idea. Its 1934 specification, the one andonly “patrol- torpedo- bomber” requirement ever issued, con-templated a large twin- float aircraft carrying two Mk. 13 tor-pedoes, which could be launched from the shore to attack ap-proaching enemy capital ships. However, by the time theXPTBH-2 underwent trials in early 1937, naval officials hadreached the conclusion that, from a tactical perspective, build -ing more carrier- launched torpedobombers (i.e., DouglasTBDs) was far more practical than the PTB concept. An unso-licited proposal received from Martin resulted in the mid–1937contract for the prototype XPBM, followed later in the yearwith an order for 20 more production models. When it flew forthe first time in February 1939, the XPBM-1 was arguably themost advanced twin- engine flying boat in the world, and as de-liveries of new PBM-1s proceeded in 1940 and 1941, BuAeradded a series of contacts for 379 PBM-3s to be delivered in1942. Consolidated‘s bid to offer the Navy a militarized variantof its highly innovative civil Model 31 twin- engineflying boat did not materialize into a P4Y productionorder until early 1942, however, the type never actuallyachieved production due to unavailability of R-3350engines.

The Navy’s most ambitious program during thisperiod was perhaps the so- called “Sky Dread-naughts”—huge, four- engine flying boats that couldassume a long- range bombardment role in case Amer-ica ever found itself cutoff from access to overseasland bases. Development contracts for the four- engineprototypes were issued to Sikorsky in 1935 for theXPBS, to Consolidated in 1936 for the XPB2Y, andfinally, to Martin in 1938 for the XPB2M. Competitivetrials between the XPBS-1 and XPB2Y-1 ended in early1939 when Consolidated received a limited productioncontract for six PB2Y-2s. Naval officials still had se-rious reservations over the four- engine program interms of cost: since three PBYs could be procured forthe cost of one PB2Y, the same amount of ocean areacould be patrolled by simply buying more PBYs forless money. In due course, the passage of the NavalExpansion act in late 1940 led BuAer to contract for210 PB2Y-3s in addition to the PBY-5s and PBM-3salready on order. Martin’s XPB2M-1, massing overtwice the weight of the PBS or PB2Y, was damagedduring taxi tests in late 1941 and did not fly until mid–1942, by which time the entire Sky Dreadnaught con-cept had been abandoned in favor of other wartimepriorities. All of the production PB2Ys and the soleXPB2M ended up as over- ocean transports in 1942 and1943.

A shift in the post–World War I military policy, one whichhad barred the Navy from maintaining any type of land- basedbomber force, opened the door to acquisition of 20 lend- leaseLockheed Hudsons in April 1941 as the PBO-1. As they enteredNavy service during late 1941 and early 1942, PBOs were chieflyintended to conduct antisubmarine patrols off the U.S. Coast.After December 1941, the Navy ended up procuring huge num-bers of Army land- based bombers under the PB or P designa-tion: 1,713 Consolidated PB4Ys (AAF B-24), 706 North Amer-ican PBJs (AAF B-25), and 2,133 Lockheed PVs (AAF B-34).Between 1927 and 1932 BuAer also assigned patrol designationsto five Sikorsky twin- engine amphibians as the PS-1, -2, and -3, later reclassifying them as utility transports, and to five“flying life boats” acquired for the Coast Guard as the GeneralAviation PJ-1 and -2.

Curtiss H-16 (Large America)—1917


Type: Four- to five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City, New

York; Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 349 (USN)


Curtiss H-16

Powerplants: Two 400-hp Liberty 12-cylinder water- cooled enginesdriving four- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 95 mph; ceiling 9,950 ft.; range 378 mi.Armament: Two .30-caliber Lewis machine guns in the bow, one .30-

caliber Lewis machine gun on each side in waist positions, andone .30-caliber Lewis machine gun in the rear cockpit; and one230-lb. bomb carried under each wing.

Weights: empty 7,400 lbs., 10,900 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span (upper) 95 ft. 1 in., length 46 ft. 2 in., wing area

1,164 sq. ft.

The Curtiss H series of flying boats, beginning with theH-4 “America” in 1914, followed by the H-8 in 1915 and the H-12 in 1916, have the distinction of being the first type of combat- capable aircraft to be mass- produced in the United States duringWorld War I. With the help of the Royal Naval Air Service fa-cility in Felixstowe, England, the H series progressively im-proved over time, resulting by late 1917 in the introduction ofthe H-16 with larger wings in four bays of struts, a Porte two- step sponson hull, heavier armament, and more powerful V-12engines. Like most aircraft of the period, construction was pri-marily wood with fabric- covered wings and tail surfaces.

The first operational H-16 was accepted by the Navy inFebruary 1918 and 199 production models followed, with 72being allocated to the RNAS. U.S. versions were equipped with400-hp Liberty engines, whereas RNAS types, designated Fe-lixstowe F.2As, were powered by 345-hp Rolls- Royce Eagles.Wartime demand for H-16s grew to such a great extent that license- production was awarded to the new Naval Aircraft Fac-tory at Philadelphia, which completed a further 150 examplesbetween March and October 1918. Curtiss tested an H-16 re-configured with pusher engines and wing sweep to compensatefor the change in center of gravity, but no production of thetype resulted. After the armistice, many H-16s continued inNavy service, and the final examples were not withdrawn until1929.

Curtiss HS—1917TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (HS-2L)

Type: Three- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City, New

York; Standard Aero Corp., Plainfield, New Jersey; Lowe, Willardand Fowler Co., College Point, New York; Gallaudet AircraftCorp., Norwich, Connecticut; Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle,Washington; and Loughead Aircraft Mfg. Co., Santa Barbara,California.

Total produced: 1,151 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 350-hp Liberty 12-cylinder water- cooled engine driv-

ing a four- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Performance: Max. speed 83 mph; ceiling 5,200 ft.; range 517 mi.Armament: One flexible .30-caliber Lewis machine gun in the bow;

and one 230-lb. bomb under each bottom wing.Weights: 4,300 lbs. empty, 6,432 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span (upper) 74 ft. 1⁄2 in., length 39 ft., wing area 803

sq. ft.

Designed in response to a Navy requirement for a smallercoastal patrol flying boat, the HS-1 (initially developed as the twin- engine H-14) appeared in early 1917 as a one- third scale- down of the H-16 having a single pusher- mounted powerplant.The HS-1 was conceived as a 3-bay biplane, and like the H-16,incorporated the refinements of the Porte- type hull. The firstHS-1 proved to be underpowered with the original 200-hp Cur-tiss VXX V-8 engine, but performance dramatically improvedwhen the aircraft was refitted with a 350-hp Liberty V-12 inOctober 1917. Designated the HS-1L, the Liberty- powered typewas ordered into large- scale production in such great numbers


The H-16, along with the NAF F-5L, remained in service as theNavy’s standard maritime patrol type from 1918 up through thelate 1920s. The final example was retired in 1929.

Curtiss HS-2L

that, in addition to the Curtiss order for 664 examples, licensecontracts were given to Standard Aircraft Corp. (250), Lowe,Willard and Fowler Co. (200), Gallaudet Aircraft Corp. (60),Boeing Airplane Co. (50), and Loughead Aircraft Co. (2), for

1,226 aircraft total. When the war ended, however,these orders were cut back to 1,101 aircraft, whileanother twenty to twenty- five were reportedly as-sembled at various naval stations from spare partsavailable. To boost armament payload, the HS-2Lappeared in mid–1918 with an eleven foot one inchincrease in wingspan and an additional bay ofstruts, and all pending HS production was thereafterbought up to the 2L standard. The final version, theHS-3L featuring an improved hull design, did notfly until 1919, and only five had been completed byCurtiss and two by NAF when all HS productionceased.

The HS claimed the honor of being the firsttype of American- designed and -built aircraft to bereceived by U.S. forces in France, when, in late May1918, the first eight HS-1Ls were taken into serviceby the Navy station at Pauillac and, as deliveriesproceeded, another 174 HS-1Ls and 2Ls equippednine more stations in France by the time of thearmistice in November. After the war, the HS-2Lremained the Navy’s standard single- engine patroland flying boat trainer until the last examples wereretired in 1926. Four HS-2Ls were loaned to theCoast Guard in 1920 and 1921 to conduct the firstsearch and rescue experiments and six operatedwith the Marines from 1922 to 1926 in the expedi-tionary detachment at Guam.

Naval Aircraft Factory/Curtiss F-5L (PN-5, -6)—1918

Type: Four- to five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City, New York; Cana-dian Aeroplanes, Ltd., Toronto, Ontario.

Total produced: 227 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Two 420-hp Liberty A 12-cylinder water- cooled engines

driving four- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propellers.Armament: Two .30-caliber Lewis machine guns in the bow, one .30-

caliber Lewis machine gun on each side in waist positions, andone .30-caliber Lewis machine gun in the rear cockpit; and one230-lb. bomb carried under each wing.

Performance: Max. speed 90 mph; ceiling 5,500 ft; range 830 mi.Weights: 8,720 lbs. empty, 13,600 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span (upper) 103 ft. 9 in., length 49 ft. 4 in., wing area

1,397 sq. ft.

Coming as the ultimate evolution of the Curtiss LargeAmericas that began with the H-8, the F-5L incorporated im-provements of the Felixstowe F.5 such as removal of theenclosed cockpit, increased fuel capacity, enlarged wing area,more powerful engines, straight- balanced ailerons, and a taller,


An HS-2L shown in World War I–era markings. A total of 1,152were produced by five manufacturers between 1918 and 1919.This type remained in Navy service until 1926.

Naval Aircraft Factory F-5L

balanced rudder. Though slightly slower than the H-16, the F-5 enjoyed a significant improvement in range. Powered by Lib-erty uprated 12A engines, the first F-5L, built by NAF, was de-

livered to the Navy for trials in September 1918,too late to see action. Production continued afterthe war, however, with 136 more F-5Ls beingcompleted by NAF, 60 by Curtiss, and 30 byCanadian Aeroplanes, Ltd. The last two, com-pleted by NAF as F-6Ls, featured improvementsto the hull and a reshaped fin and balanced rud-der, and most F-5Ls remaining in service duringthe early 1920s were subsequently brought up tothis standard. When the Navy adopted a stan-dardized designation system in 1922, the F-5Lsbecame PN-5s and the two F-6Ls became PN-6s. PN-5s/-6s, together with H-16s, continued toform the mainstay of the Navy’s flying patrolboat force until replaced by newer types duringthe late 1920s. Four F-5Ls are known to have op-erated with the Marine detachment in Haiti dur-ing the early 1920s.

Navy- Curtiss NC-1to NC-10—1918

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NC-4)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co.,

Garden City, New York; Naval Aircraft Factory,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and various sub- contractors.

Total produced: 10 (USN)Powerplants: Four 420-hp Liberty A 12-cylinder water-

cooled engines driving two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 90 mph; ceiling 4,500 ft.;range 1,470 mi.

Armament: (None installed).

Weights: 15,874 lbs. empty, 28,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span (upper) 126 ft., length 68 ft. 3 in., wing area 2,380

sq. ft.

The NC-4 completed the first crossing of the AtlanticOcean by any aircraft when it reached England on May 31, 1919,following a 51 hour, 31 minute flight which had originated fromRockaway Beach, New York. Popularly known as “NancyBoats,” the NC (Navy- Curtiss) class stemmed from a mid–1917Navy requirement for a flying boat that possessed transatlanticrange for extended submarine patrols. The initial developmentcontract was issued to Curtiss in November 1917, and followinga study of several different design concepts by naval officials,a three- engine layout was adopted. Because the NCs were clas-sified as a research and development project, the four aircraftordered were not to be built at the main Curtiss plant in GardenCity but sub- contracted out to eight different companies forvarious parts and sub- assemblies.

The NC-1 was completed in late September 1918 and madeits first flight on October 4. Despite lifting a record payload of51 passengers and crew in November, the three- engine layout


This NAF-built F-5L is shown in postwar markings. Derivedfrom the Curtiss H-16, the F-5L incorporated the increased wingarea and greater fuel capacity of the Royal Navy’s FelixstoweF.5. It served until the late 1920s.

Curtiss NC-4

was determined insufficient to lift the takeoff weight (i.e.,28,000 lbs.) to carry enough fuel for transatlantic range, as aresult of which the NC-2 was completed in April 1918 with fourengines mounted in a tandem configuration. But when perform-ance with the tandem engines proved to be unsatisfactory, theNC-3 and -4, which both flew in early 1919, were completedwith two engines mounted in tandem between the wings on thecenterline and two tractor engines mounted outboard; the NC-2 was thereafter cannibalized so that the NC-1 could bemodified to the NC-3/-4 standard. The NC transatlantic flightplan called for 3,875-mile, five- leg journey from RockawayBeach: 540 miles to Halifax, Nova Scotia; 460 miles toTrepassey Bay, Newfoundland; 1,300 miles to the Azores; 800miles to Lisbon, Portugal; and finally, 775 miles to Plymouth,England. After departing on May 8, 1919, the NC-1 and -3 bothwere subsequently damaged upon landing in the Azores, theNC-1 being abandoned, while the NC-3 jury- rigged sails tomake it as far as Sao Miguel Island. The NC-4 was left to ul-timately complete its journey twenty-three days after departingthe U.S. coast.

Six more aircraft, NC-5 through -10, were built by NAFduring 1918 and 1919, the NC-5 and -6 being completed in a three- engine configuration and NC-7, -8, -9, and -10 in the four- engine NC-4 pattern. The NCs still in service in 1922 were re- designated P2N. Upon completion of a publicity tour in 1919,the hull of the NC-4 was placed on display by the SmithsonianInstitution. After obtaining the remaining components fromstorage, a total restoration of the NC-4 was completed as a joint Navy- Smithsonian project in 1969, and it was loaned to theNavy in 1974 for exhibition in the Naval Aviation Museum inPensacola, Florida, where it remains today.

Naval Aircraft FactoryPN-7, -8, -9, -10, and -12—1924

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PN-7 [PN-12])

Type: Five to six- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 8 (USN)Powerplants: Two 525-hp Wright T-2 12-cylinder water- cooled engines

driving two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propellers [two 525-hpWright R-1750D 9-cylinder air- cooled engines driving three- bladed groundadjustable metal propellers].

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the bow, one flex-ible .30-caliber machine gun amidships, and up to four 230-lb.bombs carried under lower wing.

Performance: Max. speed 105 mph [114 mph]; ceiling 9,200 ft. [10,900ft.]; range 655 mi. [1,310 mi.].

Weights: 9,637 lbs. [7,699 lbs.] empty, 14,203 lbs. [14,122 lbs.] loaded.Dimensions: span (upper) 72 ft. 10 in., length 49 ft. 1 in. [49 ft. 2in.],

wing area 1,217 sq. ft.

The PN series represented a cumulative effort on the partof NAF and BuAer from 1924 to 1928 to develop and test con-cepts for a new type of patrol flying boat that would replacethe Navy’s World War I–era fleet of wooden- hulled PN-5s andPN-6s. Construction of the first of the series, the PN-7, wasbegun during 1923; the first was completed in January 1924 andthe second in June. While it retained the wooden hull of thePN-5, the PN-7 incorporated an entirely new set of single- baybiplane wings of fabric- covered, metal construction that utilized


The NC-4 became the most famous of the series when it com-pleted the first flight across the Atlantic Ocean on May 31, 1919.It is preserved today at the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola,Florida.

Naval Aircraft Factory PN-9

a much thicker section USA 27 airfoil in placeof the RAF 6 of the PN-5. The increase in liftpermitted a significant reduction in bothwingspan and area, plus the strength resultingfrom the deeper wing spars required only onebay of struts outboard the engines. In place ofthe old Liberty engines, experimental WrightT-2 powerplants were tractor- mounted in neat,streamlined nacelles with the water radiatorsslung under the upper wing center section. Tri-als conducted during 1924 indicated vastly im-proved performance over the PN-5; however,the Wright engines proved to be unreliable, andBuAer officials expressed concerns over the long- term durability of the wooden hull.

Based upon experience gained with thePN-7, the first of two PN-8s ordered was deliv-ered in January 1924 with a duraluminum hullidentical in shape to the Porte- type sponson hulland was flown with Wright T-3 engines. Otherchanges included a longer- chord fin and rudder,plus horizontal tail surfaces possessing athicker airfoil section. The second example, de-livered in May 1925 as the PN-9, was testedwith 480-hp geared Packard 1A-2500 V-12 en-gines behind large water radiators; soon after-ward, the PN-8 was converted to the Packardengines and re- designated PN-9. In companywith the metal- hulled Boeing XPB-1 (seebelow), the Navy planned to use both PN-9s toattempt the first flight from the California coastto Hawaii. As events turned out, however, onlythe second PN-9 was deemed ready for the2,410-mile flight, and it departed San Franciscoon August 31, 1925. Twenty- eight and a halfhours and 1,841 miles into the flight, the PN-9was forced to land in the ocean approximately560 miles from Hawaii due to fuel exhaustion.The seaworthiness of its metal hull was aptlydemonstrated after the crew, using fabric panelsdetached from the lower wings, sailed the air-craft the remaining distance to the islands. De-


Left, top: Although the hull was similar to H-16/F-5L, the PN-7 introduced a shorter span,single-bay wing having a much thicker airfoilsection, and new engines producing 25 percentmore power. Middle: PN-9 no. 1 after beingforced to land at sea between California andHawaii due to fuel exhaustion in August 1925,used fabric from the wings and sailed theremaining 560 miles to Pearl Harbor over a10-day period. Bottom: The Wright Cyclone-powered, metal-hulled PN-12 depicted in thisphotograph became the patrol boat pattern forthe Douglas PD, Hall PH, Keystone PK, andMartin PM.

spite the shortfall, the flight still attained recognitionfor a new seaplane distance record.

Given the success of the PN-9s, BuAer orderedfour essentially identical PN-10s, two of which weredelivered in late 1926. During trials carried out during1927, the two PN-10s went on to establish new seaplanerecords for distance, speed, and payload. Due to the air- cooled engine policy implemented by BuAer in1927, NAF was directed to complete the other two PN-10s with different radial engine types under the newdesignation PN-12. The first, equipped with Wright R-1750 Cyclone engines, was delivered in December 1927and the second, with Pratt & Whitney R-1690 Hornets,arrived in June 1928. In May 1928 the first PN-12 set anew seaplane record when it carried a payload of 2,205lbs. (1,000 kg) over a distance of 1,242 miles (2000 km)at an average speed of 80.5 mph (130 kph). Once BuAersettled on the Wright- powered PN-12 as the pattern forthe Navy’s new generation of patrol boats, aircraft com-panies were invited to submit proposals and, over a twoyear interval, contracts awarded to four different air-frame contractors. (See Douglas PD, Hall PH, MartinPM, and Keystone PK, below.)

Boeing PB—1925

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XPB-1)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 800-hp Packard 2A-2540 12-cylinder

water- cooled engines driving four- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propellers.

Armament: (None installed.)Performance: Max. speed 125 mph, cruise 80 mph; ceiling

3,300 ft.; range 2,230 mi.Weights: 12,742 lbs. empty, 26,822 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 87 ft. 6 in., length 59 ft. 5 in., wing area

1,823 sq. ft.

Ordered by BuAer in 1925, the XPB-1 was essen-tially a scale- up of the NAF PN-7 (see above) incor-porating an all- metal two- step, aluminum hull togetherwith a unique tandem arrangement for its two Packardengines. Originally, the Navy had contemplated usingthe XPB-1 to lead two NAF PN-9s on the first flight at-tempt between the California coast and the HawaiianIslands. Although the XPB-1 made it first flight on Au-gust 31, 1925, persistent problems with the Packard en-gines caused its participation in the California- Hawaiitrip to be cancelled. The XPB-1 was thereafter retainedby NAF as a testbed, and during 1928, once BuAer hadofficially switched to a preference for air- cooledengines in Navy aircraft, it was re- designated XPB-2after being modified and tested with 500-hp Pratt &Whitney R-1690 Hornet radial engines, also mountedin tandem, but no production was undertaken.


Boeing PB-1

The PB-1, when it appeared in mid–1925, was the first type of naval patrolboat to be built with an all-metal hull. The single prototype spent most ofits career with NAF as a flying testbed.

Sikorsky PS-1 (S-36)—1927TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Eight- place patrol amphibian.Manufacturer: Sikorsky Aero Engr. Co., Bridge-

port, Connecticut.Total produced: 5 (USN)Powerplants: Two 225-hp Wright J-4 9-cylinder

air- cooled engines driving two- bladed groundadjustable metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 110 mph; ceiling 15,000ft. (est.); range 200 mi.

Weights: Empty (not reported); 6,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 56 ft., length 34 ft., wing area

(not reported).

Sikorsky’s second flying boat design, thecompany model S-36, was flown and testedduring 1927 with far better success than the short- lived S-34 of 1926. While sharing theS-34’s general design concept, the S-36 pos-sessed more wing area and featured a sesqui-plane layout having the wing floats mounted below the bottomwings. Another difference was an upper wing positioned higherover the fuselage to permit the engines and nacelles to bemounted below it. The first S-36 was flown with open cockpits

but subsequent versions came with a raised cockpit enclosureand cabin that blended into the rear of the hull. Of five S-36sknown to have been built, one was sold to the Navy for evalu-ation purposes in 1927 or 1928 as the XPS-1.

Sikorsky PS/RS-2 and -3(S-38), and RS-1 (S-41)—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (RS-3 [RS-1])

Type: Ten- to twelve- place patrol and utility amphib-ian.

Manufacturer: Sikorsky Aero Engr. Co. (later SikorskyAviation Div. of United Aircraft Corp.), Bridge-port, Connecticut.

Total produced: 9 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Two 420-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340

Wasp [575-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690-34 Hor -net] 9-cylinder water- cooled engines driving two- bladed groundadjustable metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph [133 mph], cruise109 mph [115 mph]; ceiling 18,000 ft. [13,500 ft.];range 600 mi. [575 mi.].

Weights: 6,548 lbs. [8,100 lbs.] empty, 10,479 lbs.[13,800 lbs.] loaded.

Dimensions: span 71 ft. 8 in. 78 ft. 9 in.], length 40 ft.5 in. [45 ft. 2 in.], wing area 720 sq. ft. [790 sq.ft.].

Sikorsky’s first real commercial success, theamphibious S-38, made its first flight on June 25,1928. It was a thirty percent scale- up of the S-36having twice the horsepower and three times therange. In order to maintain similar proportions,the engines were suspended from the upper wingon struts and the wing floats were lowered. After11 civil versions had been sold as the S-38A, twoexamples were acquired by the Navy in late 1928to be evaluated as the XPS-2.


Sikorsky XPS-1

The first Sikorsky amphibian tested by the Navy in 1928, the S-36 was initially eval-uated in the armed patrol role as the XPS-1.


The major production variant, the S-38B, was introduced in late 1928 withslightly more powerful Wasp engines andgreater fuel capacity, and over 100 hadbeen delivered to civil operators by end of1932. Four S-38Bs were procured by theNavy between 1929 and 1932 and takeninto service under the designation PS-3.In 1933, after removing the gun positionsin the bow and stern, BuAer reclassifiedthe PS-2s and -3s as transports under thedesignations RS-2 and -3, respectively.One RS-3 was assigned to the MarineCorps and used at Quantico and in Nica -ragua until 1935.

Though outwardly resembling the S-38, the S-41 of 1931 was actually ten per-cent larger and could lift an almost 50 per-cent greater useful load. Besides a five- foot lengthening of the hull plus bigger,fully cowled Hornet engines, the S-41 dis-carded the lower sesquiplane layout of theS-38 for a single upper wing having tenpercent more area. The first three went tocommercial users, then in 1933, three wereacquired by the Navy as RS-1 utility am-phibians, one subsequently being assignedto Marine Corps squadron VO-9M inHaiti. All RS-1s, -2s, and -3s were phasedout of service during the mid–1930s.

Left: RS-2 and -3 were derived from the S-38. This RS-3, assigned to the Marine Corps in 1931, was based in Quantico and sawservice with expeditionary forces in Nicaragua. Right: The RS-1 was based upon the slightly larger S-41. Photo depicts one of threeRS-1s delivered to the Navy in 1933. Note cowl rings and absence of lower sesquiplane wing.

Sikorsky RS-3

Naval Aircraft Factory P4N(PN-11)—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XP4N-1)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-

vania.Total produced: 5 (USN)Powerplants: Two 575-hp Wright R-1820-64 Cyclone 9-cylin-

der air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in bow, oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in rear cockpit, and upto 920 lbs. of bombs in underwing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 115 mph; ceiling 9,000 ft.; range1,930 mi. max.

Weights: 9,770 lbs. empty, 20,340 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 72 ft. 10 in., length 54 ft., wing area 1,154

sq. ft

The PN-11 and P4N represented an effort to achievebetter performance by combining a more streamlinedhull with the biplane wings and powerplants of the PN-12. (The PN-12 actually preceded the PN-11 by a year.)Since its introduction on the Curtiss H series in 1915,nearly every large Navy flying boat had been designedwith some variation of the Porte sponson- type hull.Comparatively, the new hull was longer, deeper inprofile, and approximately thirty percent narrower inbeam. The chief advance expected was not speed butimproved hydrodynamic efficiency allowing highertakeoff weights, which corresponded to more fuel andrange. The new hull also introduced a new empennagearrangement featuring twin fins and rudders on top ofa high- mounted horizontal stabilizer. In 1927 BuAer or-dered two aircraft with the new hull as the PN-11, andthe first, powered by 525-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690Hornet engines, was flown in Oc-tober 1928, and the second, with525-hp Wright Cyclones, in June1929. Trials indicated that the PN-11, with the same takeoff power asthe PN-12, had picked up a 2,500-lb. increase in useful load thatcould be translated to a 600-mileimprovement in range.

BuAer placed an order inmid–1929 for three similar aircraftas the XP2N, but changed the des-ignation to XP4N-1 before the firstexample was accepted in Decem-ber 1930. The XP4N-1 was virtu-ally identical to the PN-11, whilethe other two, both completed inMarch 1932 as the XP4N-2s, car-ried an extra 150 gallons of fuelthat raised takeoff weight by 1,250lbs. Although the PN-11s and


The PN-11/XP4N-1 was a hybrid design, incorporating a narrower hull and twin-fin empennagewith the biplane wings of the PN-12. The new hull shape became a key element in the designsof the PY/P2Y and P2M/P3M.

Naval Aircraft Factory PN-11

P4Ns never served operationally, the new hullbecame a key element of new monoplane pa-trol boats like the XPY/ P2Y and P2M/P3M.

Douglas PD—1929TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa

Monica, California.Total produced: 25 (USN)Powerplants: Two 525-hp Wright R-1750 Cyclone

(later 575-hp R-1820) 9-cylinder air- cooledradial engines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gunin bow, one flexible .30-caliber machine gunin rear cockpit, and up to 920 lbs. of bombsin underwing racks.

Performance: max. speed 114 mph, cruise 94 mph;ceiling 10,900 feet; range 1,309 mi.

Weights: 8,319 lbs. empty, 14,988 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 72 ft. 10 in., length 49 ft. 2 in., wing area 1,162 sq.

ft.

The first of four flying boat types to be manufactured tothe specification of the Naval Aircraft Factory–designed PN-12,

Douglas received a contract from BuAer on December 27, 1927,to build twenty- five aircraft under the designation PD-1. It wasthe first Navy flying boat to be manufactured in quantity sinceWorld War I and also the first flying boat of any type to be com-pleted by Douglas Aircraft. Other than engine nacelles withflat top and bottom profiles, PD-1s were constructed according

to the PN-12 specification without variation. The actualdate of the first flight was not reported, but the first pro-duction PD-1s were listed as having been accepted andplaced into service with San Diego–based VP-7 in June1929. As deliveries proceeded, the type also equipped bothVP-4 and VP-6 at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Like most of theNavy’s second generation of biplane patrol boats, the ca-reer of the PD-1 was relatively brief, and all had been with-drawn from active service by the end of 1936.

Hall PH—1929TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PH-3)

Type: Four to five- place patrol and rescue flying boat.Manufacturer: Hall Aluminum Aircraft Corp., Buffalo,

New York and Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 24 (USN, USCG)Powerplants: Two 875-hp Wright R-1820-F51 Cyclone 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, variable- pitch metal propellers.

Armament: (PH-1 and -2 only) four flexible .30-calibermachine guns in bow and waist positions and up to1,000 lbs. of bombs or depth charges carried underthe wings.

Performance: Max. speed 159 mph, cruise 136 mph; ceiling21,350 ft.; range 2,300 mi. max.

Weights: 9,614 lbs. empty, 17,679 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 72 ft. 10 in., length 51 ft., wing area 1,170

sq. ft.

The longest- lived of the series derived from the de-sign of the Naval Aircraft Factory PN-12, the Hall PH wasthe last type of biplane flying boat in American militaryservice. Hall Aluminum became the second of four com-panies ultimately selected to manufacture the NAF design,


Shown from the rear quarter, the Douglas PD-1 appeared in 1929 as the first pro-duction derivative of the NAF PN-12 and was part of a broad Navy effort to replaceolder patrol boats like the H-16 and F-5L.

Douglas PD-1

receiving a contract in December 1927 to builda prototype under the designation XPH-1.While all of the patrol boats based on the PN-12 were very similar in general layout, theydiffered in details according to the manufac-turer. The XPH-1, when delivered to Anacostiafor trials late in 1929, appeared with a rakedforward hull having a more blended sponson,a taller elephant- ear rudder, and full- chordcowlings that faired into the engine nacelles.In its test program, the XPH-1 demonstratedsuperior aerodynamic efficiency by postingbetter speed and range than the similarlyequipped PN-12. BuAer awarded Hall a con-tract in June 1930 to produce nine examples asthe PH-1, and deliveries started late in 1931.Production models differed in having enclosedcockpits, uprated R-1820-86 engines, and ring- type cowlings. All nine PH-1s were subse-quently assigned to VP-8 operating out of PearlHarbor, Hawaii, and remained in service untilreplaced by PBYs during 1937.

As the Navy trended toward larger andmore complex monoplane patrol boats in themid–1930s, the Coast Guard still needed asmaller aircraft to operate in the search andrescue role. The biplane planform, allowinglower landing and takeoff speeds, was also bet-ter suited to the rough sea conditions likely tobe encountered. Thus, nearly five years afterlast PH-1 had been completed, Hall received anew contract in June 1936 to manufactureseven aircraft for the Coast Guard as the PH-2.Built to a slightly revised specification, PH-2sfeatured special rescue equipment that in -cluded facilities for as many as twenty sur-vivors plus air- to- ship and direction- findingradio systems. As the PH-2s entered service


Hall PH-3

Left: XPH-1, first of the Hall-built flying boats, as seen in late 1929. The nine production PH-1s, delivered through 1932, came withring cowlings and enclosed cockpits. All served with VP-8 out of Pearl Harbor. Right: One of 7 PH-3s ordered by the Coast Guardin 1939. This aircraft is shown in its wartme paint scheme on the ramp at CGAS San Francisco in 1942. The last PH-3s were removedfrom active service in 1944.

on both coasts during 1938, they effectively doubled(i.e., 750 miles) the Coast Guard’s operational radiusin search and rescue operations.

To keep pace with Coast Guard expansion and at-trition of the existing PH-2 fleet, Hall received an orderin early 1939 for seven more aircraft to be completedas the PH-3, with deliveries scheduled to begin in thespring of 1940. The PH-3 differed in having a revisedcockpit enclosure, no gun armament, NACA- typecowlings, and a 1,300-lb. increase in useful load. Afterthe United States entered World War II, the PH-2s and-3s were repainted in non- spectacular intermediate blueover gray schemes, but continued to operate primarilyin the search and rescue role. The last examples, re-placed by newer types such as Consolidated PBYs andMartin PBMs, were retired from Coast Guard serviceduring 1944.

Consolidated PY—1929TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XPY-1)

Type: Four to five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Corp., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)

Powerplants: Two (or three) 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-38 Wasp 9-cylinder air-cooled radial enginesdriving two- bladed, groundadjustable metal pro-pellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in thebow and one flexible .30-caliber machine gun in thewaist position.

Performance: Max. speed 118 mph, cruise 110 mph; ceiling15,300 ft.; range, 2,629 mi. max.

Weights: 8,369 lbs. empty, 16,492 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 100 ft., length 61 ft. 9 in., wing area 1,110

sq. ft.

Ordered in early 1928 as the Navy’s first mono-plane flying boat, the Consolidated XPY-1 was de-signed to a BuAer specification calling for a twin- engine aircraft having a single, parasol- mountedwing, mated to a metal hull and empennage similarto that of the NAF PN-11 (see above). The task of de-veloping the design was given to Consolidated’s IsaacM. “Mac” Laddon, who served as the firm’s chief en-gineer on large aircraft projects. In order to create theaerodynamic proportions dictated by the larger mono-plane wing, Laddon and his team first lengthened thePN-11 hull by seven feet nine inches, then positionedthe wing overhead with W- struts from which the twoengines were suspended. Horizontal spars below the W- struts were used to brace the wing structure andalso served as outriggers for the stabilizing floats. Aswith the earlier PN series, the wings and tail surfaceswere of fabric- covered metal construction, and thecockpit and crew accommodations were left open.According to standard naval procurement practicesof the day, once the design was fixed, productionrights were assigned to BuAer.


Consolidated XPY-1

The first of Isaac Laddon’s famous flying boat designs, the XPY-1 shownin 1929 on beaching gear. The type was ultimately produced by Martin asthe P2M and P3M.

Construction of the XPY-1 was completedover a ten- month period and its first flight madeon January 10, 1929. Consoli dated assigned thefactory name “Admiral” to the project, but itwas never adopted by the Navy. While testingwas underway, to boost speed and climb per-formance, BuAer ordered Consolidated to adda third R-1340 engine above the wing center- section. In early 1929, BuAer invited manufac-turers to submit proposals for production of thenew design and, ironically, the Glenn L. MartinCo., which came in as low bidder, received acontract June to build nine examples (see Mar-tin P2M, P3M, below). Consolidated thenturned to the civil airline market, ultimatelyselling 14 in three variants known as the “Com-modore” model 16, 16-1, and 16-2.

Martin PM—1930TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PM-2)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Baltimore,

Maryland.Total produced: 55 (USN)Powerplants: Two 575-hp Wright R-1820-64 Cyclone

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal pro-pellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun inthe bow, one flexible .30-caliber machine gunin the rear cockpit, and 920 lbs. of bombs car-ried under the wings.

Performance: Max. speed 119 mph, cruise 100 mph;ceiling 10,900 ft.; range 1,347 mi. max.

Weights: 9,919 lbs. empty, 19,062 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 72 ft., length 49 ft., wing area

1,236 sq. ft.

Martin’s first flying boat, the PM, also be-came the most numerous of the patrol boat


Martin PM-2

Left: A PM-1 serving with VP-9, based in Norfolk, Virginia, in the mid–1930s, the very first of a long line of flying boats to beproduced by Martin over a 30-year interval. Enclosed cockpit and cowl rings were added later. Right: The reshaped bow and twin-fin empennage distinguishes this factory-new PM-2. The 55 PM-1s and -2s, as the most numerous PN-12 derivatives, equipped fivepatrol units from 1930 to 1938.

types derived from the design of the NavalAircraft Factory PN-12. In May 1929, whenMartin received a contract to build twenty- five aircraft as the PM-1, the companyalready enjoyed a well- deserved reputationas one of the Navy’s most reliable airframecontractors. The following October, afterconstruction had started, BuAer added fivemore of the flying boats to the order. Listedas the company model 117, PM-1s were vir-tual duplicates of the PN-12, varying onlyslightly in finished weight. Deliveries of thenew aircraft to fleet units started right onschedule in July 1930, but before the processcould be completed, three of the PM-1s werediverted to the Brazilian government to assistit in putting down a rebellion; in an ironicturnabout, the rebels, who staged a suc cess -ful coup while the planes were still en route,ultimately took delivery of them when theyarrived. After entering Navy service, all PM-1s were later upgraded with ring cowlingsand fully enclosed cockpits.

In June 1930, Martin received a thirdcontract for twenty- five improved PM-2s(Model 122), which differed from -1s in hav-ing a reshaped forward hull profile and thetwin fin empennage of the PN-11. Deliveriesof all PM-2s were completed between Juneand September of 1931, making Martin- builtpatrol boats the most numerous types inNavy service at the time. Replacing T4M-1floatplanes, PM-1s and -2s were assigned tothe Navy’s two large seaplane tenders, VP-2 and -7 aboard the Wright based in theCanal Zone and VP-8, -9, and -10 aboard theArgonne in Pearl Harbor. The phase- outof PM-1s and -2s began in the late 1930sas they were replaced by P2Ys and PBYs,with the last examples being retired inearly 1938.

Keystone PK—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PK-1)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Keystone Aircraft Corp.,

Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 18 (USN)Powerplants: Two 575-hp Wright R-1820-64

Cyclone 9-cylinder air- cooled radial en-gines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machinegun in bow, one flexible .30-caliber ma-chine gun in the rear cockpit, and 920 lbs.of bombs carried under the wings.


Keystone PK-1

A PK-1 as seen from the rear. In late 1929, Keystone became the last of four manufac-turers selected to build derivatives of the NAF PN-12. All of the 18 built were assignedto patrol squadrons operating out of Pearl Harbor.


Weights: 9,387 lbs. empty, 17,074 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 72 ft., length 48 ft. 11 in., wing area

1,226 sq. ft.

In November 1929, BuAer selectedKeystone as the fourth and last airframe contrac-tor to manufacture a derivative of the Naval Air-craft Factory PN-12. It was the only type of flyingboat ever produced at the Bristol plant. Thoughnot an established Navy contractor, Keystone hada proven record of building and delivering largeaircraft to the Army. As built, the PK-1 (no ex-perimental prototype) differed from other PN-12types in having the twin- fin tail group seen onthe PN-11 (see P4N, below) and engines in NACA- type engine cowlings mounted in aslightly lower position. The only variation fromthe standard, sponson- type hull was a flattenedbow having an access hatch. While the date ofthe first flight was not recorded, all of theeighteen PK-1s ordered were known to have beendelivered to the Navy by September 1931. PK-1swere assigned to VP squadrons based at PearlHarbor, Hawaii and remained active until beingretired in July 1938. They were the last biplanepatrol boats to serve in the Navy.

Martin P2M and P3M—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (P3M-2)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Total produced: 10 (USN)Powerplants: Two 525-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690-32


Martin P3M-2

Left: One-of-a-kind XP2M-1 as seen at NAS Anacostia in mid–1931. Because of the additional weight and drag, the third engine (aswith the XPY-1) was deemed impractical. Right: One of nine Hornet-powered P3M-2s. The first three P3M-1s were underpoweredwith two Wasp engines, while the remaining six came with 525-hp Hornets as P3M-2s.

Hornet 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the bowand one flexible .30-caliber machine gun in the rearcockpit (no bomb load listed).


Weights: 10,032 lbs. empty, 17,977 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 100 ft., length 61 ft. 9 in., wing area 1,119

sq. ft.

As direct developments of the Consolidated XPY-1 of 1929 (see above), the P2M and P3M were bothbyproducts of a naval aircraft procurement systemwhich permitted one manufacturer’s design to be pro-duced by an altogether different company according toa competitive bidding process. In this case, Martin un-derbid Consolidated, receiving two contracts in June1929 to build one development aircraft as the XP2M-1plus nine others as the P3M-1. With the XP2M-1, Martinwas given considerable leeway in making certain engi-neering changes, while the XP3M-1s were to be exactcopies of the XPY-1, including its original two- enginelayout. The first of three P3M-1s, powered by 450-hpR-1340 Wasp engines and having an open cockpit, wasdelivered in January 1931; however, when overall per-formance fell substantially below expectations, BuAerdirected Martin to complete the six remaining aircraftto a revised specification under the designation P3M-2and modify the three P3M-1s to the same standard. Theupgrade included installation of 525-hp Hornet enginesencased in ring cowlings, plus fully enclosed cockpits.But even after trials with the new engines, the P3M’sperformance was still substandard, causing them to bereplaced in frontline service within a year and reas-signed to NAS Pensacola as trainers, and threeremained on the naval inventory as of December 1941.

The one- of- a- kind XP2M-1 was rolled- out for its firstflight in June 1931. It differed from the P3Ms in havingthree 575-hp Cyclone en gines, two mounted directly tothe wings in nacelles and a third on top. The wing itselfwas positioned lower in relation to the fuselage. Shortlyafter the XP2M-1 commenced flight trials, Navy officialsdetermined that the extra weight and drag of the third en-gine effectively offset any advantage in speed and climb,and ordered it removed. However, by the time the aircraftresumed testing later in the year as the XP2M-2, the Navyhad decided to award Consolidated a constructioncontract for the very similar P2Y-1. The wing- mountednacelle arrangement was later adopted on the P2Y-3.

Sikorsky P2S—1932

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XP2S-1)

Type: Three- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Sikorsky Aviation Div. of United Aircraft Corp.,

Bridgeport, Connecticut.


Sikorsky XP2S-1

The sole prototype of XP2S-1, delivered to NAS Anacostia in June 1932.After a year of trials, the Navy decided not to pursue the small patrolboat concept and cancelled development.

Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-88 Wasp 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun the bow, oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun the rear cockpit, and up to1,000 lbs. of bombs carried under the wings.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph; ceiling 13,900 ft.; range (notreported).


After selling the XPS-1 and four PS-2s to the Navybetween 1927 and 1929, Sikorsky endeavored to interestBuAer in a pure flying boat patrol type that looked morelike scaled- down PN-12 instead of the company’s usual am-phibian designs. Sikorsky received a development contractin mid–1930 to build one prototype as the XP2S-1, but didnot deliver a completed aircraft to NAS Anacostia, Mary-land for testing until June of 1932, nearly two years later.Using an all- metal hull similar in shape to that of the HallPH-1, the XP2S-1 appeared as a two- bay, equal- span biplanewith its two Wasp engines mounted in a tandem configu-ration. Overall performance was on a par with the largerbiplane patrol boats of that era, though its range was notrevealed. After approximately one year of official trials,the Navy cancelled the project.

Hall P2H—1932

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XP2H-1)

Type: Six- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Hall Aluminum Aircraft Corp., Buf-

falo, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Four 600-hp Curtiss V-1670-54 Con-

queror 12-cylinder water- cooled inline enginesdriving three- bladed, groundadjustable metalpropellers.

Armament: Five flexible .30-caliber machine gunsin bow, waist, and tail positions and up to2,000 lbs. of bombs or depth charges carriedunder the wings.

Performance: max. speed 139 mph, cruise 120 mph;ceiling 10,900 ft.; range 3,350 mi. max.

Weights: 20,856 lbs. empty, 43,193 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 112 ft., length 70 ft. 10 in., wing

area 2,742 sq. ft.

The largest Navy flying boat to be builtsince the Curtiss NC-4, the Hall P2H repre-sented an experimental effort to enlarge boththe range and offensive capabilities of a navalpatrol flying boat. Notably, it became the lastbiplane patrol type to be completed to a Navyspecification and the first to feature tail gunarmament. When ordered in June 1930 as the XP2H-1, BuAerdeparted from standard practice by specifying water- cooledCurtiss engines, apparently due to the inherent problem of cool-ing rear- mounted radial engines in a tandem arrangement. Hall

evolved a design in which the dimensions of the PH-1 were in-creased by a factor of approximately fifty percent, yielding overtwice the wing area and interior hull volume. The four engines,mounted at the lower wing roots, sat on wide, raised pylons


Massing over twice the weight of the PH, the XP2H-1 was built to evaluate long-range patrol missions. By the time trials were concluded in 1933, BuAer had decidedto pursue monoplane designs instead.

Hall XP2H-1

that also contained the radiators. The XP2H-1was flown for the first time on November 15,1932, and was accepted by the Navy soon after-ward. By mid–1933, however, BuAer hadreached a decision to concentrate instead onmore modern monoplane designs like the Con-solidated XP3Y-1 and Douglas XP3D-1, and asa consequence, development of the XP2H-1 wasdiscontinued.

Consolidated P2Y—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (P2Y-3)

Type: Five- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Corp., Buffalo,

New York.Total produced: 47 (USN)Powerplants: Two 750-hp Wright R-1820-90 Cyclone

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, groundadjustable metal pro-pellers.

Armament: One flexible .30-caliber machine gun inthe bow, two flexible .30-caliber machine gunsin the waist positions, and up to 2,000 lbs. ofbombs carried on underwing racks.


Weights: 12,769 lbs. empty, 21,291 lbs., 25,266 lbs.loaded.

Dimensions: Span 100 ft., length 61 ft. 9 in., wing area1,514 sq. ft.

In May 1931 BuAer gave Consolidated a de-velopment contract for the XP2Y-1, a redesignof the XPY-1 which involved the addition ofsesquiplane wings to the upper hull. The sequis -


Consolidated P2Y-2

Left: A P2Y-1 serving with VP-10 over Norfolk, Virginia, in late 1933. The lower sesquiplane wing not only provided extra lift butalso added space for fuel tankage and weapons storage. Right: One of 23 P2Y-3s, seen in 1935. Twenty-one P2Y-1s were subsequentlymodified to incorporate the P2Y-3 improvements and returned to service as P2Y-2s. Used as trainers during World War II.

plane layout, adding 404 square feet of wing area, notonly reduced wing loading and improved payload but alsosupplied additional space for fuel storage and bomb racks.Other enhancements included a fully enclosed cockpitand more power ful R-1820 engines equipped with ringcowlings. In June 1931, after reviewing competitive pro-posals, BuAer awarded Consolidated a contract to producea further twenty- three examples as the P2Y-1, with deliv-eries scheduled to start in early 1933. The XP2Y-1 madeits first flight on March 26, 1932, in the three- engineconfiguration originally specified, but following twomonths of trials, the third engine was removed, and a two- engine layout was adopted as the production standard.

The first production P2Y-1s began entering servicewith VP-10 at Naval Air Station Norfolk, Virginia in Feb-ruary 1933, and by the end of the year were also equippingVP-5 in the Panama Canal Zone. Demonstrating the ca-pabilities of their new aircraft, these two units made somenotable long- distance flights: nonstop from Norfolk toCoco Solo, Canal Zone in late 1933; then nonstop fromSan Francisco to Pearl Harbor in mid–1934. The last P2Y-1 on the production line became the XP2Y-2 in August1933 when modified to have its engines remounted onthe upper wing in nacelles, together with full- chord enginecowlings having moveable cowl- flaps. In December 1933,following trials of the XP2Y-2, Consolidated received acontract to manufacture twenty- three more aircraft to bedelivered as the P2Y-3. San Diego–based VP-7 receivedits first P2Y-3 in January 1935, and all had been deliveredto Navy units by the end of May. Starting in 1936, at least twenty- one P2Y-1s underwent modifications that broughtthem up to the P2Y-3 standard and were thereafterreturned to service as the P2Y-2. While on active service,P2Y-1s, -2s and -3s also served at various times with VP-4, VP-14, VP-15, VP-19, VP-20, and VP-21. The Navy beganthe process of replacing P2Ys with new PBYs in frontline unitsduring the late 1930s, but many continued afterward in serviceat NAS Pensacola as flying boat trainers, and 41 were still onhand in December 1941.

General Aviation PJ/FLBFlying Lifeboat—1932

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PJ-1)

Type: Seven- place search and rescue flying boat.Manufacturer: General Aviation Manufacturing Corp. (later North

American Aviation, Inc.), Dundalk, Maryland.Total produced: 5 (USCG)Powerplants: Two 420-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340C-1 Wasp 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed, ground- adjustablemetal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 120 mph; ceiling 15,000 ft. (est.); range 1,150mi.

Weights: 7,000 lbs. empty, 11,200 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 74 ft. 2 in., length 55 ft., wing area 754 sq. ft.

Designed to a U.S. Coast Guard specification calling fora twin- engine aircraft to be used primarily in open- sea searchand rescue operations, The General Aviation PJ started life in1930 as the company Model AF-15. After reviewing competitiveproposals from several manufacturers, the Coast Guard selectedGeneral Aviation’s (formerly Fokker Corp. of America)proposal as the winning entry and initially identified the newaircraft as the flying life boat (FLB) without assigning a specificmilitary designation. Though fifteen percent larger and betterstreamlined, the general layout of the FLB was similar to thecompany’s earlier Fokker F-11A flying boat, also designed byAlfred A. Gassner. The date of the first flight is not a matter ofrecord, however, the first aircraft was evidently completedsometime in late 1931 and accepted by the Coast Guard in Jan-uary 1932 as FLB-8. Shortly after General Aviation was mergedinto North American, FLB-8, and the four production examplesthat followed it, received the designation PJ-1. As completed,the PJ-1 featured an all- metal hull reinforced with numerousexternal strakes on the sides and bottom so it could withstandthe stresses of landing and taking off in heavy seas. The twoWasp pusher engines, encased in ring cowls behind conical na-celles, were mounted atop the wing on streamlined pylons. For


General Aviation PJ-1

beaching, small wheels enclosed in fairings could be folded- down from the wings.

As all five PJ-1s entered operational service during 1932,they were assigned the following USCG serial numbers andnames: FLB-51 (formerly FLB-8) Antares, FLB-52 Altair, FLB-53 Acrux, FLB-54 Acamar, and FLB-55 Arcturus. Three of thePJs were based at the Coast Guard station at Cape May, NewJersey, and the other two, Miami, Florida. In 1933, FLB-51 wassent to the Naval Aircraft Factory in Philadelphia to be fittedwith new 500-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690 Hornet engines thatwould be remounted in a tractor configuration. When theaircraft reappeared as the PJ-2, its engines rested on struts ratherthan pylons and featured tight- fitting NACA- type cowlings thatblended into the nacelles. Although the PJ-2 proved to be 15mph faster and had slightly better range, the four PJ-1s werenever modified. In their role as flying lifeboats, the five aircraftbegan accumulating a very impressive record, making manynoteworthy rescues in the open ocean that would have otherwisebeen impossible. But as a consequence of the tremendous wearand tear on the airframes due to operations in heavy seas, theCoast Guard was forced to start retiring them after less thanten years of service: FLB-54 Acamar was withdrawn in mid–

1937; FLB-52 Altair in early 1940; FLB-53 Acrux in late 1940;and finally, both FLB-51 Antares and FLB-55 Arcturus by theend of 1941.

Douglas P3D—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XP3D-2)

Type: Seven- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, California.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 900-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-64 Twin Wasp 14-


Armament: One .30-caliber machine gun in a bow turret, two flexible.30-caliber machine guns on each side of the dorsal position, andup to 4,000 lbs. (est.) of bombs, depth charges, and torpedoescarried on underwing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 183 mph; ceiling 18,900 feet; range 3,380mi. max.

Weights: 15,120 lbs. empty, 22,909 lbs. normal gross, 27,946 lbs. max.takeoff.

Dimensions: Span 95 ft., length 69 ft. 7 in., wing area 1,295 sq. ft.

The P3D and its amphibious Army counterpart, the OA-5,represented a serious but ultimately unsuccessful attempt byDouglas to gain a share of the growing military flying boat


Top: Flying Life Boat 53, Acrux, shown later in its career whenthe Coast Guard had gone to an overall silver paint scheme.Acrux was one of the last PJs retired, in late 1940. Bottom: Thefirst FLB delivered in early 1932 as FLB-8, it became the PJ-2,FLB-51 (V116) Antares, after being converted to tractor enginesby the Naval Aircraft Factory in 1933. This was the only exampleto be modified.

Top: The chief contender against Consolidated’s XP3Y-1 (laterXPBY-1) in the Navy’s 1935 patrol boat fly-off, the XP3D-1reportedly lost the competition because of its higher unit cost.Bottom: The modified XP3D-2 as seen during new patrol boattrials conducted in mid–1936. Despite the improvement in speed,the Navy elected instead to acquire 50 PBY-2s.

market during the early and mid–1930s. The process actuallybegan as far back as 1932 when the Navy and Army both ex-pressed interest in a large, twin- engine flying boat that couldbe utilized for either patrol or bombing missions. In December1932 the Army gave Douglas a contract to proceed with designwork on an amphibious flying boat under the designation XB-11, but after inspection of the mockup in April 1933, the desig-nation was changed to YO-44. Only a month later, in an anal-ogous project designated the XP3D-1, BuAer authorizedDouglas to perform engineering studies with the option to orderconstruction of a prototype. The Navy exercised its option inFebruary 1934, and construction of the Army prototype wasapparently approved around the same time, so that the two air-craft were built almost side- by- side. Whereas the YO-44 wasessentially an experimental Army project, the XP3D-1 wouldbe competing directly with the Consolidated XP3Y-1 (seebelow) for a sizeable Navy production contract.

Apart from the engines specified and amphibious landinggear, the XP3D-1 and YO-44 were almost identical. As theshared design emerged, it featured a two- step metal hull and a

fully cantilevered, shoulder- mounted wing having the two en-gines mounted above on twin pylons. Stabilizing floats werefixed below the wings on struts. Positioned in front of the wind-screen behind the mooring hatch, the bow turret was the firstto appear on any type of military flying boat. The single finempennage resembled a scale- up of the arrangement seen onthe Dolphin. On February 6, 1935, the Twin Wasp–poweredXP3D-1 was rolled out for its first flight; the Cyclone- poweredYO-44, under the new designation YOA-5 (observation- amphibian), followed just eighteen days later.

Competitive trials between the XP3D-1 and the XP3Y-1,conducted at Naval Air Station Anacostia, Maryland duringthe spring of 1935, revealed acceptable performance and han-dling qualities from both aircraft. The selection of the XP3Y-1for production over the XP3D-1 was apparently based on unitcost more than any other single factor. Soon afterward, theXP3D-1 returned to the factory to be readied for yet anotherround of patrol boat competition scheduled for the next year.When it reemerged in May 1936 as the XP3D-2, the engineshad been upgraded to 900-hp R-1830-64s and moved down to

nacelles on the wing, plus the floats now foldedinto the wings. These enhancements increasedtop speed by 22 mph and gave some im prove -ment in range, but were not sufficient to gain theproduction contract, which BuAer subsequentlyawarded to Consolidated for fifty PBY-2s. Whilethe YOA-5 underwent extensive evaluations withthe U.S. Army Air Corps, no production was everordered.

Consolidated PBY (P3Y)Catalina—1935

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS(PBY-1 [PBY-5])

Type: Seven- to nine- place patrol- bomber flying boat(amphibian).

Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Co., San Diego,California.

Total produced: 1,713 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplants: Two 900-hp [1,200-hp] Pratt & Whitney

R-1830-64 [-92] Twin Wasp 14-cylinder, twin- row air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, variable- pitch [constant- speed] metal propellers.

Armament: One [two] .30-caliber machine guns in anose turret, two flexible .30-caliber [.50-caliber]machine guns in the waist [blister] positions, [oneflexible .30-caliber machine gun in the tunnel],and up to 4,000 lbs. of bombs, depth charges, ortorpedoes carried on underwing racks.

Performance: Max. speed 177 mph [195 mph]; ceiling20,900 ft. [17,700]; range 4,042 mi. [2,860 mi.]max.

Weights: 14,576 lbs. [18,790 lbs.] empty, 28,447 lbs.[34,000 lbs.] loaded.

Dimensions: Span 104 ft., length 65 ft. 2 in. [63 ft. 10in.], wing area 1,400 sq. ft.


Douglas XP3D-1

In terms of sheer numbers, longevity, andversatility, the Consolidated PBY Catalina wasdestined to become the most famous and mostwidely used flying boat in the history of aviation.The origins of the PBY can be traced to a re-quirement issued by BuAer during 1933soliciting proposals for a new type of patrol boatthat would eventually replace the Navy’s existingfleet of P2Ys and P3Ms. Consolidated receiveda development contract in October 1933 to builda flying prototype of its proposed Model 28under the designation XP3Y-1, and a similar con-tract was given to Douglas in February 1934 tobuild the rival XP3D-1 (see above). Both aircraftwere scheduled to arrive at Anacostia for com-petitive trials in early 1935.

Taking the experience accumulated with thePY and P2Y, Isaac M. Laddon and Consoli-dated’s engineering staff evolved the design ofthe XP3Y-1 as an all- metal monoplane to be pow-ered by newly available 850-hp Pratt & WhitneyTwin Wasp engines. Special emphasis wasplaced on drag- reducing features such as astream lined pylon supporting a broad, semi- cantilevered wing that dispensed with all but apair of diagonal lift struts on each side, togetherwith stabilizing floats that retracted flush intothe wings to form the tips and a fully canti -levered cruciform tailplane. The entire airframewas to be clad in metal except for fabric- coveredcontrol surfaces and wing section aft of the mainspar.


Consolidated PBY-2

A PBY-1 shown serving with Pearl Harbor-based VP-6 in 1937. The order of 100 PBY-1s and -2s in 1935 and 1936 represented anacross-the-fleet upgrade of the Navy’s patrol boat force.

Construction of the prototype was completed at Consoli-dated’s Buffalo plant in early 1935 just prior to the company’smove en masse to San Diego. On March 21, 1935, after beingshipped by rail to NAS Anacostia, the XP3Y-1 made its firstflight. Trials carried out afterward demonstrated a significantimprovement in performance over earlier patrol boat types, andwhile the Douglas XP3D-1 compared favorably, Consolidatedbid a lower unit cost ($90,000 each) and consequently receiveda contract to produce sixty aircraft as the P3Y-1. During the fall

of 1935, the prototype was returned to the factory for changesthat included lengthening the nose eighteen inches to accom-modate an enclosed gun turret, redesigned vertical tail surfaces,and installation of 900-hp R-1830-64 engines. In the interval,the designation was changed to PBY-1, denoting new naval em-phasis on the bombing role of the overall patrol mission.

Shortly after being redelivered and test flown on May 19,1936, the revised XPBY-1 posted a record nonstop flight of3,443 miles. As deliveries of production aircraft proceeded,


Top: A PBY-3 with double tail bars. The 176 PBY-1s, -2s, and -3s represented an across-the-board replacement of the Navy’s maritimepatrol force during the late 1930s. Bottom: A PBY-4 with VP-3 in 1939. The “13” preceding the “P” on the nose indicated Patrol WingOne, Third Squadron. This was the first PBY variant to feature gun blisters and reshaped rudder.

PBY-1s began entering service with Pearl Harbor squadronsduring the fall of 1936, initially with VP-11, then with VP-12.In mid–1936, BuAer held yet a second competition betweenthe XPBY-1 and the substantially modified Douglas XP3D-2,with the result that Consolidated prevailed again, receiving acontract in July 1936 to manufacture fifty more aircraft as thePBY-2, which differed from the PBY-1 only in small details. Asproduction continued, the first PBY-2s reached VP units inmid–1937, with the last being delivered by February 1938.

In a move designed to upgrade substantially all of theNavy’s old patrol boat fleet, BuAer awarded Consolidated an-other contract in November 1936 to manufacture sixty- six PBY-3s, which would be powered by 1,000-hp R-1830-66 engines.PBY-3s began entering service in late 1937, and by August 1938,when the last had been delivered, fourteen Navy patrolsquadrons were equipped with PBY-1s, -2s, and -3s, includingfive based at Pearl Harbor and two in the Panama Canal Zone.In December 1937, as part of its plan to replace older aircraft,BuAer ordered thirty- three PBY-4s to be powered by 1,050-hpR-1830-72 engines, with the first examples reach-ing operational service during 1938. The last threePBY-4s were competed with blister- type enclo-sures over the waist gunner’s position, a featurethat became standard on future models. In orderto expand mission versatility, BuAer directed thatthe last PBY-4 be returned to the factory and con-verted to an amphibian having tricycle retractablelanding gear. This aircraft was flown onNovember 22, 1939, as the XPBY-5A.

In December 1939, in connection with a gen-eral expansion of naval aviation prompted by thestart of World War II in Europe and increasingtensions with Japan in the Far East, BuAerordered 200 PBY-5s, the largest Navyprocurement of a single type of aircraft sinceWorld War I. PBY-5s featured a squared offrudder, 1,200-hp R-1830-82 engines (using 100-octane fuel), plus an upgrade to .50-caliber gunsin the waist blisters. During the same time period,Consolidated received additional orders for 174essentially similar Model 28-5Ms to be deliveredto Great Britain, France, Australia, and Canada,the French order, following the German conquest,being eventually absorbed by Great Britain. Thefirst Navy PBY-5 was accepted in September 1940and the second delivered to the Coast Guardshortly afterward. Taken into RAF service as theCatalina I, the British Model 28-5Ms differed inhaving R-1830-S1C3G engines, six .303-caliberguns with twin mounts in the blisters, self- sealingfuel tanks, and 225 lbs. of extra armor platingaround the gunner’s positions. By December 1941,the Navy had a total of 362 PBYs in service,which included 164 PBY-5s and 33 amphibi ousPBY-5As.

Wartime contracts resulted in orders being placed withConsolidated for an additional 1,533 PBY-5s and -5As, which,besides Navy production, included 54 to the USAAF as theOA-10, 225 to Great Britain under Lend Lease, and 12 to Dutchforces in the East Indies. To keep pace with PBY demand, Con-solidated opened a second assembly line in 1943 at a new plantlocated in New Orleans, Louisiana. Another 731 PBY-5/-5Avariants were manufactured in Canada by Canadian- Vickersand Boeing of Canada. PBY-5/-5A production in the U.S. ter-minated in January 1945, and the final Consolidated variant,167 PBY-6As, was produced at New Orleans from January toSeptember 1945, at which point all PBY production ceased.

Hall PTBH—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XPTBH-2)

Type: Four- place patrol- torpedo- bomber floatplane.Manufacturer: Hall Aluminum Aircraft Corp., Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 800-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-60 Twin Wasp 14-


Hall XPTBH-2


Armament: One .30-cal. machine gun in bow turret, one flexible .50-cal. machine gun in waist position, one .30-cal. machine gun in

ventral tunnel, and one 1,850-lb. torpedo or 2,000lbs. of bombs carried beneath the fuselage.

Performance: Max. speed 182 mph; ceiling 19,200 ft.;range 850 mi.

Weights: 11,992 lbs. empty, 21,414 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 79 ft. 4 in., length 55 ft. 11 in., wing

area 828 sq. ft.

The Hall PTBH was the only Navy aircraftto ever receive the patrol-torpedo- bomber desig-nation. Its origins can be traced to a BuAer re-quirement issued in early 1934 for a torpedo- armed seaplane that would be launched to attackenemy capital ships (i.e., battleships and battle-cruisers). The initial specification contemplateda twin- engine, twin- float seaplane with a maxi-mum takeoff weight of 25,000 lbs. which couldcarry two 1,927-lb. Mk. 13 aerial torpedoes. A de-velopment contract was awarded to Hall on June30, 1934 to construct a single prototype under thedesignation XPTBH-1; however, as detaileddesign work proceeded to the mockup stage laterthat year, it became evident that the anticipatedspeed and range could not be achieved carryingtwo torpedoes, thus BuAer reduced the specifica-tion to one torpedo and a takeoff weight of 20,000lbs. The designation changed from XPTBH-1 toXPTBH-2 when the engine requirement waschanged from Wright Cyclones to Pratt & Whit-ney Twin Wasps.

Completion of the prototype fell behindschedule due to Hall moving its operations fromBuffalo, New York to its new plant in Bristol,Pennsylvania. The XPTBH-2 finally made its firstflight from the factory on January 30, 1937, andwas delivered to Anacostia the following April.

Although the prototype was accepted and briefly tested, navalofficials had in the interval deemed the PTB concept to be im-practical and decided instead to concentrate on single- engine, carrier- based torpedobombers like the Douglas TBD.

Sikorsky PBS—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XPBS-1)

Type: Ten- place long- range patrol- bomber flying boat.Manufacturer: Sikorsky Aviation Div. of United Aircraft Corp.,

Bridgeport, Connecticut.Total produced: 1 (3 JR2S-1)Powerplants: Four 1,050-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-68 Twin Wasp

14-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, variable- pitch metal propellers.

Armament: One 50-caliber machine in a bow turret, one flexible . 30-caliber machine gun in each waist position, and one 50-calibermachine in a tail turret (presumed to carry bomb load similar toPB2Y but no information available).

Performance: Max. speed 227 mph; ceiling 23,100 ft.; range 3,170 mi.(normal), 4.545 mi. (max.).

Weights: 26,407 lbs. empty, 48,541 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 124 ft., length 76 ft. 2 in., wing area 1,670 sq. ft.


The one-of-a-kind XPTBH-1 seen over the Maryland coast in thespring of 1937. By the time the prototype arrived for testing,naval policy had shifted back toward carrier-based torpedobombers like the TBD.

Sikorsky XPBS-1

The PBS, as the Sikorsky model S-44, came into being asone of three “Flying Dreadnoughts” to be considered by theNavy between 1937 and 1942 (see also Consolidated PB2Y andMartin PB2M, below). When BuAer requested proposals forits ambitious four- engine project in early 1935, the competitionwas limited to Consolidated and Sikorsky initially, Martin beinginvited to submit a proposal three years later. From the start,because of the enormous expense involved (i.e., $300,000+ peraircraft, not including development cost), the Navy viewed theFlying Dreadnoughts as an experimental program, limited tosingle prototypes. Production, if undertaken, would be basedupon extensive testing and operational evaluation. After receiv-ing a development contract in June 1935 to construct one pro-totype as the XPBS-1, Sikorsky and his staff began evolving avery modern design that was both functional and elegant. Whilesharing some similarities with the S-34 airliner, the XPBS-1eliminated the need for supporting pylons or struts by em -ploying a very deep, two- step hull that curved upward from thesecond step to raise the tail group clear of the sea- spray. Equallyas innovative, the tapered, fully cantilevered wing smoothlyblended into the top of the hull and incorporated fully articu -lated trailing flaps over 55 percent of the span.

After a twoyear construction period, the XPBS-1 proto -type completed its maiden flight on August 13, 1937. Initialtesting revealed a top speed of 227 mph and a loaded rangewell within design specifications (i.e., 3,000 miles+). A stabilityproblem traced to turbulence generated by the wings was cor-rected by adding dihedral to the horizontal stabilizers. Afterbeing delivered to the Navy in October 1937, the XPBS-1 wasjoined by the Consolidated XPB2Y-1 in mid–1938, and ex -tensive trials between the competing prototypes followedthroughout the balance of the year. Even though the Navy offi-cially accepted the XPBS-1 in January 1939, BuAer announced

that Consolidated’s entry had narrowly won the competitionon a point basis and would be selected for limited productionas the PB2Y-2. The XPBS-1 was thereafter assigned to PatrolWing Five at NAS Norfolk, Virginia, where it was used to eval-uate long- range patrol- bomber operations until late 1941. Earlyin the new year, the aircraft was reassigned to VR-2 out of NASAlameda, California, for transport duties between the WestCoast and the Hawaiian Islands, and on June 30, 1942, whilereturning from Pearl Harbor, the XPBS-1 struck a log in SanFrancisco Bay and sank. Included among the passengers andcrew, all of whom safely escaped, was Admiral Chester W.Nimitz, commander of the Pacific Fleet.

Efforts to offer a 32-passenger civil version of the XPBS-1 resulted in the sale to American Export Airlines in late 1939of three aircraft as the VS-44A (denoting a name change to Vought- Sikorsky Div. of United Aircraft). In mid–1942, shortlyafter all three VS-44As had begun airline operations, they wereimpressed into naval service under the designation JR2S-1. OneVS-44A was destroyed in a takeoff accident in October 1943,but in late 1944, the other two were returned to airline owner-ship.

Consolidated PB2Y Coronado—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PB2Y-2)

Type: Ten- place long- range patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Co., San Diego, California.Total produced: 217 (USN, USCG)Powerplants: Four 1,200-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-78 Twin Wasp

14-cylinder, twin- row air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, constant- speed metal propellers outboard and four- bladed, fully reversible propellers inboard.

Armament: One .50-cal. machine gun in a nose turret, one flexible.50-cal. machine gun in a dorsal blister, one flexible .50-cal. machinegun in each waist position, one flexible .50-cal. machine gun ina ventral tunnel, and one .50-cal. machine gun in a tail turret,plus up to 8,000 lbs. of bombs, depth charges, and/or torpedoescarried in wing bays.

Performance: max. speed 255 mph; ceiling 24,100 ft.; range 4,275 mi.max.

Weights: 40,495 lbs. empty, 68,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 115 ft., length 79 ft. 3 in., wing area 1,780 sq. ft.

The Consolidated PB2Y was one of several large, four- engine flying boats (see Sikorsky PBS, above, and MartinPB2M, below) conceived to fulfill the Navy’s “Sky Dread-nought” concept, which envisaged a very long- range aircraftthat not only fulfilled the traditional maritime patrol functionbut could also operate as a heavy bomber from widely dispersedsea bases. Originally proposed to BuAer as the company Model29, Consolidated received a contract on July 27, 1936 to builtone flying prototype under the designation XPB2Y-1. Whilesharing some characteristics in common with the PBY, such asfolding wing floats, a cruciform tail group with a single fin andrudder, and a bow projecting in front of the nose turret, the de-sign of the XPB2Y-1, by comparison, offered a much deeperhull having fully cantilevered wings mounted directly atop thefuselage without any supporting pylon. Its higher aspectratio


The first of the “Sky Dreadnoughts,” the XPBS-1 as delivered inAugust 1937. In June 1942, after being assigned to transportsduties, this aircraft was lost when it struck a log in San FranciscoBay and sank.

wing, swept from the leading edge, carried aload factor (i.e., 30 lbs. per sq. ft.) approxi-mately 30 percent higher than that of the con-temporaneous PBY-2. Except for moveablecontrol surfaces, the entire structure wasskinned in stressed aluminum. A very cleanoverall configuration was achieved by housingall droppable munitions in flush bays under thewings.

After a construction period of slightly lessthan eighteen months, the XPB2Y-1 made itsfirst flight from San Diego on December 17,1937. Serious problems with directionalstability were immediately encountered, withthe result that finlets were added to the hori-zontal stabilizers after the third flight. Furthertesting revealed continuing stability problemstogether with the need to improve the hydrody-namic characteristics of the hull planing sur-faces. The prototype returned to the factory andemerged in mid–1938 with totally redesignedempennage in which twin circular fins and rud-ders had been end- mounted to a new horizontalstabilizer that possessed about six degrees ofdihedral. To enhance hull performance, the rearstep had been lengthened to extend nearlyhalfway to the tail. The Navy accepted theXPB2Y-1 following suitability trials, but no pro-duction was ordered at that time. The aircraftwas thereafter assigned to the Aircraft ScoutingForce as the admiral’s “flag ship.”

In March 1939, after what amounted to avirtual redesign of the hull, BuAer authorizedConsolidated to proceed with the constructionof six PB2Y-2s. The hull of the -2 wasdeepened to such an extent that the wing wasmoved down to a shoulder position on the fuse-lage. Both streamlining and hydrodynamics were improved byfairing the bow smoothly into a reshaped nose turret. Enlargedfins and rudders now resembled those of the Model 31 (see P4Y,below), and available horsepower was boosted fifteen percentby an upgrade to R-1830-78 engines. New gunner’s positionsappeared as a dorsal blister behind the wing and circular win-dows on each side in the waist. In November 1940, even beforethe first PB2Y-2 had been accepted, Consolidated received acontract for 210 production aircraft, 177 to be delivered to theNavy as the PB2Y-3 under a revised production standard thatincluded heavier armament, armor protection, and self- sealingfuel tanks, plus 33 similar aircraft to Great Britain as the PB2Y-3B.


Right: An XPB2Y-1 shown in original configuration in front ofConsolidated’s plant in San Diego, California, in late 1937. Direc-tional control problems resulted in the addition of finlets andlater, twin fins.

Consolidated XPB2Y-1

Named “Coronado” by the factory, the first PB2Y-2 was delivered to the Navy on December 31,1940, and four more had been accepted by mid–1941.While empty weight had risen 7,500 lbs., top speed in-creased to 255 mph at 19,000 feet and normal rangewas nearly twice that of the PBY-5. Following delivery,the Navy used the five PB2Y-2s mainly for operationaltraining and evaluation. The sixth PB2Y-2, modifiedto the new production standard, flew in December 1941as the XPB2Y-3. However, once the war started, theNavy abandoned the Sky Dreadnought notion in favorof fast carriers using smaller aircraft to bomb targets,and as a result, virtually all of the PB2Ys were there-after converted or completed as unarmed cargoversions to be used as over- ocean transports (PB2Y-3Rand -5R) or for medical evacuation (PB2Y-5H). FivePB2Y-3s and -5s were assigned to Coast Guard WestCoast operations in 1944.

Lockheed PBO/R4O—1938TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PBO-1)

Type: Four- place land- based patrol- bomber, transport.Manufacturer: Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Burbank, Califor-

nia.Total produced: 21 (USN)Powerplants: Two 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-40 Cyclone 9-

cylinder air- cooled engines driving three- bladed Hamil-ton Standard constant- speed propellers.

Armament: Two fixed .30-cal. machine guns in nose, one flex-ible .50-caliber machine gun in a dorsal position, up to1,400 lbs. of bombs (or depth charges) carried in an in-ternal bomb bay.

Performance: Max. speed 253 mph at 15,000 feet; ceiling26,500 ft.; range 2,800 mi. max.


551 sq. ft.

The Lockheed Model 14 “Super Electra” initiallyentered service as a 12-passenger airliner in September1937, only two months after making its first flight. Itsdesign embodied the state- of- the- art, presenting a verysleek, elliptical- section fuselage mated to a mid- winghaving compound taper at the trailing edge. To offsethigh wing- loading (31.5 lbs. per sq. ft.), Lockheed in-troduced a system of tracked Fowler- type trailing- edgeflaps and fixed leading- edge slots that kept landingspeeds in the 70 mph range. The first militarized ver-sions, Model 14Ls reconfigured for armed coastalpatrol, were ordered by the British government in June1938 and began entering service with RAF CoastalCommand the next year as the Hudson I, then from1939 onwards, approximately 2,000 more were deliv -ered to Britain and its Commonwealth Nations in sixvariants (Hudson I, II, III, IV, V, and VI).

The Navy acquired its first Super Electra in late1938, a civil Model 14H2 powered by Pratt & Whitney


One of five PB2Y-2s delivered in 1940 and 1941. The sixth became the PB2Y-3 template for mass production. All PB2Y-s were initially assigned to VP-13, a West Coast transition training squadron (TTS).

Consolidated PB2Y-2

R-1690-52 Hornet engines, which was placed inservice under the designation XR4O-1 and basedat NAS Anacostia to be used as a fast VIP trans-port. In May 1941, as American war preparationsintensified, the U.S. Government ordered Lock-heed to deliver 416 Cyclone- powered Hudson IIIAsto the Army Air Corps as the A-29; however, thefirst 20 were diverted to the Navy for the purposeof flying convoy escort and antisubmarine patrolmissions from coastal stations. This marked a sud-den shift in the prevailing military policy that re-stricted the Navy from maintaining any type of land- based bomber force (see Douglas T2D/P2Dunder Attack Aircraft, above). Under the assignednaval designation PBO-1, the first Lockheedsbegan entering service with VP-82 at NAS Quon-set Point, Rhode Island in October 1941, and theunit had 14 on hand by year’s end. Within the sametimeframe, four more PBO-1s were received atNAS Norfolk to be used for transition training andas spares.

The first sinking of an enemy submarine cred-ited to U.S. forces occurred on March 1, 1942,when a PBO-1 of VP-82 engaged and sank U-656off Cape Race (southeast Newfoundland). PBOsremained in frontline service until being replacedby newer Lockheed PV-1s during the fall of 1942and were afterward used in PV transition trainingunits at NAS Deland and NAS Sanford in Florida.

Martin PBM Mariner—1939

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PBM-1)

Type: Seven- to ten- place patrol- bomber flying boat(amphibian).

Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Baltimore, Mary-land.

Total produced: 1,366 (USN, USCG)Powerplants: Two 1,600-hp Wright R-2600-6 Twin Cyclone 14-cylinder

air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, electric controllable- pitch metal propellers.

Armament: One .50-cal. machine gun in powered nose, dorsal, andtail turrets, one .50-cal. machine gun in each waist position, one.30-cal. machine gun firing downward in aft tunnel position, andup to 4,000 lbs. of bombs, torpedoes, or depth charges carriedin nacelle bays.

Performance: Max. speed 200 mph; ceiling 20,200 ft.; range 3,424mi. max.

Weights: 24,143 lbs. empty, 56,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 118 ft., length 77 ft. 2 in., wing area 1,400 sq. ft.

The Martin PBM, in terms of general design and structure,was arguably the most advanced twin- engine flying boat of itsday. But the real impetus behind the design had been economic:faced with financial losses on its M130 airliner and dismalprospects for commercial sales, Martin had little choice but re-turn to the highly competitive arena of military patrol boat con-tracts. Since Consolidated commanded such a strong position


A Navy PBO-1 seen in AAF paint scheme in early 1942. This wasthe first land-based Navy bomber since the T2D-1 of 1927. APBO-1 of VP-82 scored first American sinking of an enemy sub-marine on March 1, 1942.

Lockheed PBO-1

in the twin- engine market with its PBY,Martin sought to interest the Navy in a pro-posal for the four- engine model 160. Coin-cidentally, BuAer had already contracted fortwo other four- engine flying boat prototypes(see Consolidated XPB2Y-1 and SikorskyXPBS-1), and Martin hoped to insert itselfinto the eventual competition for a produc-tion contract. As an unsolicited private ven-ture, however, Martin would be obliged tofund development of a prototype, which itwas in no position to do; instead the com-pany planned to build a one- fourth (25 per-cent) scale flying demonstrator that wouldvalidate the main characteristics of the de-sign. When BuAer declined to consider an-other four- engine project, Martin went backto the drawing boards and returned in early1937 with an all- new proposal for the twin- engine model 162, which the companypromised would deliver substantially betterspeed, range, and payload than the twin- engine PBY. Consolidated’s president,Reuben Fleet, disputed Martin’s perform-ance claims and threatened the Navy withpolitical repercussions if his company losta production contract. As a compromise,BuAer awarded Martin a development con-tract the following June for a single XPBM-1 prototype with the understanding that fu-ture production plans would hinge on testresults.

Timing was critical: construction of theXPBM-1 prototype would take eighteenmonths or longer, and Martin feared this in-terval might give Consolidated the oppor-


Above: A Martin XPBM-1 in original configuration, as seen in1939 with straight horizontal stabilizer. Testing revealed a tailflutter problem remedied by adding a dihedral to the horizontalstabilizers, thus producing the “pinwheel” tail. Right: The Mar-tin M162A “Tadpole Clipper” parked under the port wing of theXPBM-1. This three-eighths (37.5 percent) scale flying testbedwas intended to prove the design concept upon which the full-size aircraft would be based.

Martin PBM-1

tunity to introduce an altogether new twin- engine prototype(i.e., Consolidated Model 31/P4Y). To speed progress, Martin’sengineering staff reworked the plan for the M160 demonstratorinto a three- eighths scale (37.5 percent) replica of the XPBM-1, and as the M162A, had it flying before the end of the year.Despite receiving a production contract for twenty- one PBM-1s in late December 1937, which had achieved the main purposeof a demonstrator, Martin continued the M162A test programand in doing so, obtained much valuable data subsequently in-corporated into the final arrangement of the XPBM-1 hull.

When rolled- out for its first flight on February 18, 1939,the XPBM-1 represented a state- of- the- art flying boat concept.The design attained new levels of aerodynamic efficiency bymounting the fully cantilevered wings to the upper hull in agull configuration which raised the engines well above the sea- spray without need for drag- inducing struts or pylons. Aft ofthe rear step, the hull curved upward to support a high- mounted twin- fin empennage designed to provide adequate directionalstability and single- engine control when needed. To keep theairframe clean, droppable munitions were housed in enclosednacelle bays and the stabilizing floats folded into the wings sothat only one side remained exposed to the slipstream. A tailflutter problem revealed in early testing was cured by addingan amount of dihedral to the horizontal stabilizers that matchedthe gull angle of the inner wings, thereby giving the type itsdistinctive “pinwheel” tail. Performance trials indicated a 17mph increase in top speed over the PBY-4, but the realdifference was that the PBM-1 would go 30 percent further car-rying twice the load of bombs or depth charges. And defensivearmament was the most formidable yet seen on any twin- enginepatrol boat: powered nose and dorsal turrets each armed witha .50-caliber machine gun, flexible .50-caliber guns in two waistpositions and in the tail, plus a .30-caliber tunnel gun firingdownward in the aft fuselage.

PBM-1s initially became operational during the fall of 1940

with VP-55 and VP-56, based at Norfolk, Virginia, then aftercombining as VP-74 in mid–1941, moved to a new base inBermuda. But even as deliveries of the first PBM-1s started,the Navy was making plans for unheard of levels of aircraftproduction and between November 1940 and August 1941, aspart of the buildup, Martin received a series of contracts for379 aircraft to be delivered as the PBM-3. The sole XPBM-2,a long- range version with increased fuel tankage and stressedfor catapult launches, was tested during 1941 but never placedin production. As of December 1941, the Navy had the XPBM-1 and XPBM-2, plus 20 operational PBM-1s on hand. Deliveriesof PBM-3s commenced in the spring of 1942, and ultimately,1,344 more of the type were manufactured, consisting of 581PBM-3s in four sub- variants, 729 PBM-5s (upgraded to Pratt& Whitney R-2800 engines), and 34 PBM-5A amphibians, thefinal examples being delivered in 1949. Twenty- seven PBM-3swere assigned to the Coast Guard in 1943, followed by 41 PBM-5s in 1944.

Consolidated P4Y (Model 31)Corregidor—1940

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XP4Y-1)

Type: Ten- place patrol flying boat.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Co., San Diego, California.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 2,300-hp Wright R-3350-8 Double Cyclone 18-cylin-

der, twin- row air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, constant- speed metal propellers.

Armament: one 37-mm cannon in a nose turret, two .50-caliber ma-chine guns in a powered dorsal turret, two .50-caliber machineguns in a powered tail turret, plus up to 4,000 lbs. of bombs,depth charges, and/or torpedoes carried externally.

Performance: Max. speed 247 mph, cruise 136 mph; ceiling 21,400 ft.;range 3,280 mi. max.

Weights: 29,334 lbs. empty, 48,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 110 ft, length 74 ft. 1 in., wing area 1,048 sq. ft.

The origins of the Consolidated Model 31 can be traced tomid–1937, when aeronautical engineer David R. Davis ap-proached Reuben H. Fleet, company president, and Isaac M.Laddon, chief engineer, with the idea of incorporating hispatented wing design (i.e., the “Davis wing”) to large flyingboats. The Davis wing comprised a narrow- chord, high- aspect- ratio planform that utilized a relatively thick airfoil section atthe center of pressure. Davis claimed that his design would gen-erate lift at very low angles- of- attack and thereby eliminatemuch of the induced drag of the wing. A series of wind tunneltests (financed by Consolidated) conducted afterward at CalTech exceeded even the most optimistic expectations, demon-strating that the Davis wing produced greater aerodynamic effi-ciency that any wing yet tested.

In 1938, with the aim of producing an experimental demon-strator that could potentially be offered on either commercialor military markets, Fleet authorized Laddon to proceed witha new flying boat design that would integrate the Davis wingwith a hull similar in configuration to that of the PB2Y. The


A production PBM-1 delivered to Norfolk-based VP-55 in late1940. The prototype’s tail flutter problem was corrected byadding dihedral to the horizontal stabilizers, giving the type itsdistinctive “pinwheel” tail.

structure utilized the advanced technique of flush- riveting thealuminum skins to the metal framework of the wings and fuse-lage. Moveable control surfaces were of fabric- covered metalconstruction. To accommodate the narrow chord of the wings,the floats were made to fold inward against the wing undersur-faces. The engines selected, experimental Wright R-3350s,were the most powerful American- made aircraft engines in ex-istence but had yet to be tested on a flying aircraft. Though notactually built to military requirements, the decision to adopt a twin- engine (instead of a four- engine) layout was undoubtedlyinfluenced by BuAer’s recent procurement of the Martin PBM(see above). The shape and arrangement of the Model 31’s twinfin tail group benefited from Consolidated’s previous experi -

ence with the PB2Y, and together with the Davis wing, wouldbe seen again in the design of the Model 32 (XB-24). Soonafter making its first flight on May 5, 1939 under civil registra-tion number NX21731, the Model 31 established itself as thefastest flying boat in the world and was also the first aircraft tofly with R-3350 engines.

After no commercial orders for the Model 31 materialized,Consolidated embarked upon a campaign in 1940 and 1941 tosell the Navy a military variant that would be completed to a patrol- bomber specification. Although BuAer evinced no in-terest in the project at the start, Consolidated nonetheless con-tinued the test program at its own expense. Revisions to theprototype during almost two years of testing included raising


Consolidated XP4Y-1

the empennage to accommodate a tail turret, adding a cuff thatwidened the planing surfaces of the forward hull, and installa-tion of dummy gun turrets. In April 1942, the Navy finally pur-chased the Model 31 under the designation XP4Y-1, and soon

afterward, ordered the type placed into production as theP4Y-1 at a new plant to be established in New Orleans,Louisiana. The factory name “Corregidor” was assignedbut never officially adopted. In mid–1943, before theP4Y-1 assembly line had been tooled- up, production wascancelled due to the fact that all R-3350 engines werebeing allocated to the B-29 program for an indefinitetime. The New Orleans plant was instead used to opena second assembly line of PBYs.

Martin PB2M Mars—1942TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XPB2M-1)

Type: Eleven- place long- range patrol- bomber flying boat.Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Baltimore, Maryland.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Four 2,200-hp Wright R-3350-8 Double Cyclone

18-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed,electric controllable- pitch laminated wooden propellers.

Armament: One .30-caliber machine gun each in nose, dorsal,waist, and tail turrets and up to 10,000 lbs. of bombs, tor-pedoes, or depth charges carried in two upper hull bays.


Weights: 75,573 lbs. empty, 144,000 lbs. loaded.

Dimensions: Span 200 ft. 0 in., length 117 ft. 3 in., wing area 3,683sq. ft

Though technically not a pre–1942 aircraft, the PB2Mwould most likely have flown sometime in late 1941 had it not

been damaged in the middle of taxi tests.Martin started preliminary design work onits Model 170 in 1937 while the Navy al-ready had two other four- engine flying boatprototypes under construction (see Siko-rsky PBS and Consolidated PB2Y, above).Under the unofficial heading “Sky Dread-nought,” naval policy makers were study -ing the feasibility of using very large flyingboats for long- range bombardment as wellas maritime patrol. On August 23, 1938,after considering Martin’s proposal, BuAerwas sufficiently impressed to award thecompany a development contract for a sin-gle prototype as the XPB2M-1. Whilemuch larger and heavier, the XPB2M-1’sstructural, aerodynamic, and hull designshared many characteristics with theXPBM-1, and its final configuration owedmuch to the data accumulated during theXPBM-1’s test program. Instead of nacellebays, munitions were to be stored in twohull compartments located just below thewings from which weapons would be de-ployed on sliding racks.

Because of unforeseen production pri-orities (i.e., B-26 bombers for the Army


An XP4Y-1 depicted in wartime colors. Retractable tip floats and bow skirt are evidentin this photograph. Allocation of all R-3350 engine production to the B-29 programcaused P4Y production to be cancelled.

Martin XPB2M-1 in 1942, soon after its first flight. Taxiing accident inNovember 1941 delayed first flight until July 1942, by which time the “SkyDreadnought” concept had been abandoned in favor of more carriers.

and Maryland and Baltimore bombers on foreign contracts),Martin did not start construction of the XPB2M-1 prototypeuntil mid–1940. As it neared completion in the fall of 1941, thegiant aircraft was christened “Mars” in line with the company’spractice of choosing names beginning with the letter M. The

XPB2M-1 was finally rolled out of the factory and launched inthe Middle River the first week of November 1941, however,while conducting taxi tests, the number three engine threw apropeller blade and caught fire. By the time the aircraft couldbe towed to shore, the starboard wing and number three nacelle


Martin XPB2M-1

had been seriously damaged by the fire and the hull where thepropeller blade penetrated. Martin spent over six monthsmaking repairs, and the first flight of the XPB2M-1 did notoccur until July 2, 1942. It was the largest flying boat to haveever flown and the second largest aircraft in the world (theDouglas XB-19 of 1941 being fractionally larger). But by thattime, the Navy had discarded the Sky Dreadnought idea andthe Mars was eventually disarmed and converted to a transportconfiguration as the XPB2M-1R.

TRAINER, TRANSPORT, ANDUTILITY AIRCRAFT

Synopsis of Trainer, Transport, andUtility Aircraft Procurement

Trainer Aircraft: By the time World War I ended, theNaval Aviation Training Establishment boasted a force of over1,000 training aircraft, consisting mainly of Aeromarine 39s,Burgess N-9s, and Curtiss F Boats and JN-4s. While some ofthese aircraft would serve on into 1920s, the Naval Bureau ofAeronautics (BuAer), after being formed in 1921, nonethelessbelieved that the Navy’s future training needs would be betterserved by one aircraft combining the functions of landplane,seaplane, and aerial gunnery into one airframe. Evaluations ofno less than six different trainer types took place between 1923and 1925, with two of the entries being ordered into production,73 Boeing NB-1s and -2s and, initially, 76 Consolidated NY-1s(naval version of the Army PT-1). Then from 1926 to 1929,BuAer ordered a further 186 NY-2s (the largest trainer ordersince 1918), 25 NY-2As, and 20 NY-3s, making it the most im-portant aircraft in the Navy’s flight training program at NASPensacola. A second trainer competition held between 1928 and1930 resulted in the purchase of 51 Curtiss N2Cs to equipreserve units, six Consolidated (Fleet) N2Ys for use in the lighter- than- air program, 16 Keystone NKs (eventual applica -tion unknown), and six New Standard NTs subsequently as-signed to NAF.

BuAer commenced an across- the- board trainer replace -ment program in 1934 when it acquired three ConsolidatedN4Y-1s (Navy variant of the Army PT-11) for evaluation pur-poses, but before any could be ordered in quantity, due to recentlegislative initiatives (i.e., Vinson- Trammel Naval Act of 1934),directed the Naval Aircraft Factory (NAF) to build its own pro-totype XN3N-1. In a series of contracts issued in 1936, NAFreceived orders for a total of 180 N3N-1s, but at virtually thesame time, BuAer ordered 61 Boeing NS-1s to relieve NAF’sproduction backlog. Of even greater import, new Naval Expan-sion Acts passed in 1938 and 1940 served to produce an explo-sion of trainer orders: 816 N3N-3s in 1939 and 1940, plus 616Boeing N2S-1s, -3s (Army PT-17) and -2s (Army PT-13) in 1940and 1941. BuAer also procured 201 Spartan NPs in 1940 ex-pressly for Naval Reserve Primary Flying Schools, then in 1941,

purchased 100 Ryan NRs (Army PT-22) to be used at a newtraining facility at NAS Jacksonville. Continuing trainer ordersfrom 1942 onwards accounted for delivery of 3,821 more N2Svariants, turning it into the Navy’s most numerically importantprimary trainer of the wartime era.

Through most of the interwar period, if it used them at all,the Navy typically employed older operational aircraft (e.g.,Vought O2U, Curtiss O2C, Martin T4M, etc.) for advancedtraining purposes, however, by the mid–1930s, significant im-provements in aircraft performance dictated the need for ad-vanced trainers to provide an incremental transition from pri-mary types into new frontline aircraft, especially fighter andattack types. Toward this end, 40 North American NJ-1s (basedon the Army BT-9) delivered in 1937 were incorporated intoflight training at NAS Pensacola, followed in 1938 by procure-ment of 16 retractable- gear versions as the SNJ-1. An urgentneed to upgrade equipment in reserve units motivated a follow- up North American contact in 1939 for 61 SNJ-2s. The hugenaval expansion that commenced in 1940 ultimately resulted inadditional orders for 545 SNJ-3s, 2,400 SNJ-4s, 1,568 SNJ-5s,and 411 SNJ-6s, and to supplement SNJs already on order, Cur-tiss received contracts in 1940 and 1941 for 305 SNC-1s. Theneed to introduce “intermediate” pilot training between primaryand advanced levels led to a contract award to Vultee in 1940for 1,350 SNV-1s (Army BT-13), with initial deliveries beginningin mid–1941. Altogether, efforts begun in 1938 had added 2,247training aircraft of all types to the naval inventory by the endof 1941.

Transport and Utility Aircraft: Unlike the aircraft typesdiscussed in the preceding categories, most of the transport andutility aircraft procured during the interwar period were notbuilt to any identifiable naval requirements but acquired as off- the- shelf civil aircraft that had been designed for either privateor commercial purposes. Moreover, BuAer’s assignment of des-ignations to these aircraft was somewhat perplexing, inasmuchas the delineation between “transport” (initially T, later R) and“utility” (J) types and sub- types appears to have been almostrandom. The designation system began following a better rule- of- thumb in the late 1930s when BuAer assigned R (transport)to larger multi- engine landplanes, JR (utilitytransport) to multi- engine seaplanes and smaller twin- engine landplanes,and G (transport, single- engine) to single- engine landplanes,but even so, J (utility) was still occasionally assigned to someseaplanes and landplanes.

Availability of the first American multi- engine commercialairliners in the mid–1920s prompted acquisition between 1927and 1932 of seven Atlantic (Fokker) F.VII tri- motors (as TA/RA)and nine Ford 4-AT and 5-AT tri- motors (as JR/RR). Used pri-marily by Navy and Marine command staff personnel, theseaircraft could also move high- priority cargos when the needarose. In this timeframe, to be used as smaller staff transports,BuAer also purchased one Fairchild FC-2 (as JQ/RQ), oneLockheed Altair (as RO), one Curtiss Kingbird (as JC/RC), andthree Bellanca CH-400 Skyrockets (as RE/JE). To improve theamphibious transportation capabilities in Navy, Marine, and


Coast Guard operations, Douglas received contracts to manu-facture 59 twin- engine RDs which were placed in service be-tween 1931 and 1934. Representing a major effort to replaceolder single- engine amphibians in the ship- to- shore utility role,BuAer awarded a series of contracts to Grumman from 1933 to1935 to produce 46 JF “Ducks,” with almost half being allocatedto Marine, Coast Guard, and Naval Reserve units. Revisionsto the Duck plus a change of designation to J2F in 1936 gener-ated even more orders: 20 J2F-1s delivered in 1937; 21 J2F-2s,nine J2F-2As, 20 J2F-3s, and 32 J2F-4s all delivered in 1939;and 144 J2F-5s, of which 68 had been received by the end of1941. A further 406 J2F-5s and -6s (built by Columbia) weredelivered during World War II.

Efforts to upgrade older Atlantic and Ford transports camein 1934 and 1935 with the procurement of two Curtiss AT-32ECondors (as R4C ) and five Douglas DC-2s (as R2D). TwoWaco UBF biplanes (as JW) acquired in 1934 were fitted withskyhook arresting systems for duties with Macon (ZRS-5). Ad-ditionally, BuAer purchased an assortment of single- engine, executive- type transports between 1934 and 1936 for both Navyand Coast Guard use: two Stinson SR-5s (as R3Q [RQ]), oneNorthrop Delta (as RT), three Kinner Envoys (as RK), oneFairchild 45A (as JK), four Fairchild 24Cs (as J2K), and threeWaco EQC cabin biplanes (as J2W). A parasolwing Fairchild22C-7 (as R2K) acquired in 1936 under naval registration wasused by NACA to test a “Zap” flap system. Two twin- engineLockheed Model 10 Electras joined the inventory as the R2Oand R3O in 1936, one for use by the Secretary of the Navy andthe other for the Coast Guard, followed in 1937 by six LockheedModel 12 Electra Juniors as the JO, three of which wereassigned to the Marines, and a seventh fixed tricycle- gear ex-ample in 1938, as the XJO-3, delivered to NAS Anacostia forexperimental purposes.

The Navy substantially upgraded its twin- engine utilityamphibian fleet from 1937 to 1939 with procurement of 17 Siko-rsky S-43s (as JRS-1) and 11 Grumman G-21s (as JRF-1). MoreGrumman Amphibians were ordered during the 1940 and 1941expansions: seven JRF-2s and three JRF-3s for the CoastGuard, 10 JRF-4s equipped with bomb racks, and finally, 185JRF-5s, of which 16 had been delivered by the end of 1941.BuAer purchased two Stearman- Hammond Y-1Ss in 1937 asthe XJH-1, to be used as target drones.

One single- engine Beech C17R Staggerwing (as JB-1)joined the inventory in 1937 as a staff transport, then ten D17Smodels (as GB-1) were added in 1939 to be used by Naval At-tachés in foreign embassies. Beech received an additional orderin 1941 for 271 D17S models, with six reaching service by theend of the year as the GB-2. A single civil Lockheed Model 14was acquired in 1939 as a fast staff transport as the XR4O-1,followed by militarized versions coming into service in 1941and 1942 as the PBO-1.

The first Navy transports actually completed to any par-ticular military requirement were four of the seven twin- engineDouglas DC-5s procured in 1940 (as R3D-1, -2, and -3), which,as R3D-2s, came with cargo doors, reinforced cabin floors, and

smaller fuel tanks (for increased payload) for use by theMarines in paratrooper operations. In mid–1940 BuAer awardedBeech a contract for 11 twin- engine Model 18S executive trans-ports modified as target drone controllers (as JRB-1), followedlater the same year with an order for 15 transport versions (asJRB-2), with all in service by the end of 1941. Another 1,400naval Beech 18 variants would be produced during World WarII (571 JRB-3s and -4s and 829 SNB-1s and -2s). BuAer com-mandeered all initial production of Grumman’s G-44 twin- engine civil amphibian in 1941, allocating the first 25 to theCoast Guard as the J4F-1; and from 1942 to 1945, a further 131were accepted under Navy Bureau Numbers as the J2F-2. Al-though originally ordered in 1940 and eventually acquired insubstantial numbers during World War II (571 R4Ds in sevenvariants), the only examples of the legendary Douglas DC-3 toactually reach Navy service during 1941 were two stock civilmodels requisitioned from Eastern Airlines (as R4D-2). Thelast type of single- engine civil transport entering service beforethe end of 1941 was six (of 34 ordered) Howard DGA-15Ps asthe GH-1; wartime orders would account for 451 more as theGH-2, -3, and NH-1.

The two types of gliders procured during the interwar pe-riod are mentioned in this category only for the purpose of or-ganization. Six one- place Franklin PS-2s were assigned to NASPensacola in 1934 to see whether gliders should be incorporatedinto the pilot training program and 13 Schweizer SGC 2-8s(LNS-1, same as AAF TG-2) went into service with the Marinesin 1941 (possibly later) to train pilots for a planned assault gliderprogram.

Curtiss/Burgess N-9—1916

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (N-9H)

Type: Two- place floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City and Buf-

falo, New York; the Burgess Co., Marblehead, Massachusetts.Total produced: 560 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 150-hp Wright- Hispano A 8-cylinder water- cooled

engine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Performance: Max. speed 80 mph at s.1.; ceiling 9,850-ft.; range 179

mi.Weights: 2,140 lbs. empty, 2,765 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 53 ft. 4 in., length 30 ft. 10 in., wing area 496 sq.

ft.

Conceived as a floatplane derivative of the Army’s popularJN trainer series, the Navy Department gave Curtiss an initialcontract in August 1916 for 30 aircraft as the N-9, and the firstexamples appeared later the same year. It differed from thebasic JN-4 series in having 10 feet of additional wingspan,larger tailplane, and a more powerful (100-hp) OXX-6 engine,which was needed to compensate for the extra weight and dragof the floats. Even so, early experience revealed that the typewas still underpowered, leading to the introduction in 1917 ofthe N-9H with the 150-hp Wright- Hispano A (a licensed copyof the French Hispano- Suiza A). By the time of the armisticein November 1918, 560 of the type, primarily N-9Hs, had been


delivered to the Navy, 460 of them havingbeen completed under license by theBurgess Co. (a Curtiss subsidiary). N-9scontinued to be extensively used in trainingand utility roles after the war, and the finalexamples were not withdrawn from serviceuntil 1927.


An N-9H standard World War I Navy trainer,basically a Jenny with a more powerfulengine, an extra bay of struts, and enlargedfin and rudder. The last examples were notwithdrawn until 1927.

Curtiss/Burgess N-9H

Aeromarine 39—1917TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (39-B)Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Aeromarine Plane & Motor Co., Keyport, New Jersey.Total produced: 200 (USN).Powerplant: one 100-hp Curtiss OXX-6 8-cylinder water- cooled engine

driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Performance: Max. speed 73 mph at s.1.; ceiling 8,200 ft.; range 273

mi.Weights: 1,467 lbs. empty, 2,017 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 43 ft. 8 in., length 27 ft. 4 in., wing area 353 sq. ft.

On October 22, 1922, an Aeromarine 39-B piloted by Lt.Cdr. Geoffrey DeChevalier became the first aircraft to land onthe Langley (CV-1), the U.S. Navy’s first aircraft carrier. In mid–1917, as a result of a successful bid on Navy Department specifi-cations issued for a training aircraft convertible to land or seaoperations, Aeromarine received a contract for 50 Model 39-As, conventional two- bay biplanes of fabric- covered woodenconstruction that were initially powered by 100-hp Hall- Scott6-cylinder engines. Early evaluations with twin floats fitted ledto an increase in the upper wingspan to reduce wing loading


Aeromarine 39-B

for easier water takeoffs. The 100 Model 39-Bs, delivered in1918, introduced refinements to the basic design that includedenlarged tail surfaces, a centerline float for seaplane operations,and an OXX-6 V-8 powerplant. In the period following the war,the Navy continued to operate the 39-Bs as one of its standardprimary trainers.

Because of its excellent low airspeed handlingqualities, the 39-B was selected for the earliest carrierexperiments. The aircraft was fitted with a rear- mounted arrestor hook to engage cross- deck cables incombination with alignment hooks on the spreader barbetween the main wheels to engage lengthwise wiresintended to keep the plane running straight. Startingin early 1923, after successful experiments, a unit of39-Bs began operating aboard Langley to test and de-velop deck procedures for handling larger numbers ofaircraft. The last examples were withdrawn in 1926.

Curtiss JN-4 and -6—1918TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JN-4H)

Type: Two- place landplane advanced and gunnery trainer.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City

and Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 261 (USN, USMC).Powerplant: One 150-hp Wright- Hispano A 8-cylinder water-

cooled engine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitchpropeller.

Armament (JN-4HG): One .30-cal. machine gun on scarfring in rear cockpit.


Weights: 1,467 lbs. empty, 2,017 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 43 ft. 8 in., length 27 ft. 4 in., wing area

353 sq. ft.

The Curtiss “Jenny,” achieved fame as the Army’smost important primary trainer during the World WarI era and later, as a civil aircraft, after hundreds hadbeen sold surplus. Although the Navy acquired smallnumbers of early Jenny variants, JN-1s, JN-1Ws (float-


On final approach, this 39-B is seen just before making the firstlanding aboard the carrier Langley on October 22, 1922. Docilehandling qualities made it a good choice for early carrier exper-iments.

The Curtiss “Jenny” was the most produced American aircraftof the World War I era. The Navy procured 30 JN-4Hs in 1918for advanced pilot training, followed by 83 more in 1919. It waswithdrawn in 1926.

Curtiss JN-4H

equipped), and JN-4Bs in 1916 and 1917, the Wright- Hispano- powered JN-4H and -4HG became the principal naval versions.Thirty JN-4Hs were procured in 1918 for advanced pilottraining, followed by 90 JN-4HGs outfitted as gunnery trainers.The Navy also purchased 10 JN-6Hs, which were distinguishedby having ailerons on both upper and lower wings. A finalbatch, 113 JN-4H advanced trainers, was accepted by the Navyduring the early postwar era. A number of JN-4Hs/-4HGs weretransferred to the Marines, where they were used for trainingand observation duties. The Navy and Marines began phasing

out their Jennies in the mid–1920s as newer aircraft came intoservice, the final examples being withdrawn in 1926.

Curtiss/Naval Aircraft Factory MF—1918TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Two- place flying boat trainer.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., Garden City and Buf-

falo, New York; Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-vania.

Total produced: 96 (USN, USCG)


Curtiss MF

Powerplant: One 100-hp Curtiss OXX-3 8-cylinder water- cooledengine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 72 mph; ceiling 4,100 ft.; range 345 mi.Weights: 1,850 lbs. empty, 2,488 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span (upper) 49 ft. 9 in., length 28 ft. 10 in., wing area

402 sq. ft.

The MF (or modified F) was introduced in 1918 as the suc-cessor to the Navy’s F Boat trainers. Although a three- bay bi-

plane of wooden construction like theF, it was actually an entirely new de-sign that utilized the sponson- typehull of the H-16, new wings having trailing- edge ailerons on the upperspan, along with a reshaped fin andbalanced rudder. The Navy gave Cur-tiss an order for 47 MFs, but only 16had been delivered when the contractwas cancelled following the WorldWar I armistice in late 1918. Eightymore examples built by NAF weredelivered to the Navy after the war,and the type remained in service as atrainer until the mid–1920s. SeveralMFs transferred to the Coast Guardwere used in 1920 and 1921 to developaerial search and rescue methods.

Aeromarine 40—1919TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (40F)

Type: Two- place flying boat trainer.Manufacturer: Aeromarine Plane & Motor Co., Keyport, New Jersey.Total produced: 50 (USN)Powerplant: One 100-hp Curtiss OXX-6 8-cylinder water- cooled

engine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Performance: Max. speed 71 mph at s.1.; ceiling 3,500 ft.; range 250

mi. (est.).Weights: 2,061 lbs. empty, 2,592 lbs.loaded.Dimensions: span 48 ft. 6 in., length 28ft. 11 in., wing area (not reported).

The Model 40, following themodel 39 trainer, was designed andbuilt in response to a 1918 Navy De-partment requirement for a two- seatseaplane trainer. Though similar ingeneral layout to the Curtiss ModelMF (see above), which it was in -tended to augment, it appeared as a two- bay biplane of fabric- coveredwooden construction, characterizedby a single- step hull having a morerounded bow and less- pronouncedsponsons than those seen on the Cur-tiss types. The Navy originally con-tracted for 200 as the Model 40F, butthe order was reduced to only 50 afterthe November armistice, and the firstdeliveries did not occur until 1919.Some Model 40Fs were reportedlyfitted with 150-hp Wright- Hispano en-gines to improve performance and


Production of the MF was foreshortened by the end of World War I. Most of 96 built werecompleted by the Naval Air Factory after the war. Several were transferred to the CoastGuard in 1920 and 1921.

Model 40 was intended to augment Curtiss Fs and MFs in the training role, however, thecontract was cut short by the end of World War I. Fifty were delivered in 1919.

payload. All had been withdrawn from service by the mid–1920s.

Huff- Daland HN/HO—1923TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (HN-1)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer, observation.Manufacturer: Huff- Daland Airplane Co., Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 9 (all versions)Powerplant: One 180-hp Wright- Hispano E-2 8-cylinder water- cooled

engine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Armament (HO-1): one .30-cal. machine gun on scarf ring in rear

cockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 114 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,700 ft.; range (notreported).

Weights: 2,020 lbs. empty, 2,545 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 33 ft. 6 in., length 28 ft. 6 in., wing area (not re-

ported).

Huff- Daland, organized in 1920, is noteworthy as havingbeen one of the first American aircraft manufacturers to adoptthe German Fokker- inspired construction techniques of welded,steel tube fuselages and thick semi or fully cantilevered wings.In 1923, the Navy ordered a total of six essentially identical air-craft, three as trainers under the designation HN-1 and threefor observation as the HO-1, the latter having provision for a


Aeromarine 40F

.30-cal. Lewis gun mounted in the rear cockpit. Huff- Daland’s semi- cantilevered biplane wing configuration closely resembledthat of the Fokker D.VII. Speci fications called for both types

to be powered by surplus Wright- Hispano engines and convert-ible to wheeled or twin float undercarriage. Three additionaltrainer versions equipped with the new 200-hp Lawrance J-1radial engine were produced for the Navy in 1925 as the HN-2. Huff- Daland was absorbed into Keystone Aircraft Corp.sometime in the late 1920s.

Naval Aircraft Factory N2N—1923TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 3 (USN)Powerplant: One 200-hp Lawrance J-1 R-787 9-cylinder air- cooled ra-

dial engine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Performance: Max. speed 106 mph at s.1.; ceiling 16,900 ft.; range (not

reported).Weights: 2,100 lbs. empty (est.), 2,640 lbs. loaded.


Huff-Daland HN-2

An HN-1, one of three ordered, is seen taking off from the Wash-ington Monument reflecting pool in 1923 or 1924. Note similar-ities to the Fokker D.VII, which inspired much of its design.

NAF N2N-1

Dimensions: span 33 ft. 8 in., length 26 ft. 11 in., wingarea 260 sq. ft. (est.).

The N2N-1 (NN designation not used) flewfor the first time in 1923 as a Naval AircraftFactory project to develop and evaluate a float- equipped trainer powered by the new air- cooledradial engine recently introduced by the LawranceAero Engine Co. Its all- wood construction andgeneral aerodynamic design were very similar tothe contemporaneous TS-1 fighter (see above),which had been designed by Rex Beisel while em-ployed by BuAer. The three N2N-1s completed byNAF were briefly used for training at NAS Pen-sacola.

Martin N2M—1924TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Glenn L. Martin Co., Cleveland, Ohio.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 200-hp Lawrance J-1 R-787 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladedwooden fixed- pitch propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 112 mph at s.1.; ceiling 19,000ft.; range (not reported).

Weights: (not reported).Dimensions: span 41 ft., length 27 ft. 10 in., wing area

(not reported).

In 1924 Martin offered the Navy another Lawrance- powered trainer which was basedlargely on the design of its Wright- Hispano–powered Model 66 Night Mail Plane of 1923. Thesole example, taken into service as the N2M-1(NM-1 had apparently been assigned to Packardfor a racer), emerged as a onebay, wood andfabric biplane characterized by low- aspect ratiowings braced by single interplane struts. After ac-ceptance trials, the aircraft saw limited service asa trainer at NAS Pensacola until the mid–1920s.


One of three N2N-1s tested in 1923, primarily to evaluate atrainer powered by a Lawrance J-1 engine. Though not orderedinto production, all three subsequently served as trainers at Pen-sacola.

The N2M-1 was another Lawrance-powered trainer that Martinadapted from its Model 66 Mail Plane design. Only one was builtin 1924, and it was later used as a trainer at Pensacola.

Martin N2M-1

Naval Aircraft Factory TG—1924TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TG-2)

Type: Two- place floatplane gunnery trainer.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 5 (USN)Powerplant: One 200-hp Liberty L 6-cylinder water- cooled engine

driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Armament: One .30-cal. machine gun on scarf ring in rear cockpit.

Performance: Max. speed 97 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,140 ft.; range (notreported).

Weights: 2,400 lbs. empty (est.), 2,800 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 36 ft. 0 in., length 30 ft. 10 in., wing area 340 sq.

ft. (est.).

The Naval Aircraft Factory built five float- equipped gun-nery trainers in 1924 as TG-1 through -5. They were conven -tional two- bay biplanes of wood and fabric construction, iden-


NAF TG-2

tical except for the powerplants installed (i.e., TG-1 and -2,200-hp Liberty 6; TG-2 and -3, 200-hp Aeromarine T-6; andTG-5, 180-hp Wright Hispano E). The type apparently was notvery successful, as none were listed as active after 1925.

Boeing NB—1924TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NB-1)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 73 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 200-hp Lawrance J-1 9-cylinder air- cooled radial en-

gine driving a two- bladed wooden fixed- pitch propeller.Armament (on some): One .30-cal. machine gun on scarf ring in rear

cockpit.


A Liberty 6-powered TG-2 in 1924. Five were built with various powerplants as gunnery trainers, but none were listed as active after1925.

The Boeing NB-1, the first type of post-war trainer to be ordered in quantity. Note the hand crank right behind engine. Like all Navytrainers of this era, it could be rigged for floats or wheels as needed.


Weights: 2,136 lbs. empty, 2,837 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 36 ft. 10 in., length 25 ft. 5 in., wing area 344 sq.

ft.

One of the first Navy trainers to be purchased in double- digit quantities following World War I, the Boeing Model 21originated as the prototype NB-1 delivered in mid–1924. AfterInitial testing revealed that the aircraft was actually too docilefor training purposes, showing a marked reluctance to spin, itwas given modifications that made it more maneuverable. Aftersatisfactory trials, BuAer awarded Boeing a contract for 42NB-1 production aircraft, and deliveries commenced before theend of the year. The design was characterized by such innova-

tions as a welded, steel tube fuselage structure, single- baywings braced by metal N- type struts, and a balanced rudder.In 1925 Boeing received a follow- on order for thirty NB-2spowered by 180-hp Wright- Hispano E-4 water- cooled engines,which, like the -1s, could be rigged with either wheels or a cen-terline float.

Most NB-1s and -2s were assigned to NAS Pensacola withVN-1D8 and VN-1D4, while some served with VN-6D5 at NOBHampton Roads and VN-7D11 at NAS North Island in SanDiego. One NB-2 modified for crop dusting served with Marinesquadron VO-6M during 1929 to spray the mosquito- infestedswamps around Santo Domingo, Nicaragua. One NB-2 was re- designated NB-4 after the fuselage was lengthened.


Boeing NB-1

Consolidated NY (N3Y)—1925

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NY-2)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Corp., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 307 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 220-hp Wright R-790-8 J-5 Whirlwind 9-cylinder


Armament (NY-1A/-2A): One flexible .30-cal. machine gun in the rearcockpit.


Weights: 1,801 lbs. empty, 2,627 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 40 ft., length 27 ft. 11 in., wing area 370 sq. ft.

Originating as a navalized development of the Army’s PT-1, the NY represented a serious effort by BuAer to upgrade theNavy’s variegated mix of training aircraft. ConsolidatedAircraft Corp., founded in 1923 by Reuben H. Fleet, launcheditself as a major military aircraft supplier in 1924 with a contractto produce 221 PT-1 trainers to replace the Army’s aging fleetof Curtiss JN-4Ds. Though powered by a surplus Wright- Hispano powerplant in order to minimize unit cost, the PT-1nonetheless offered other advanced features such as a welded


Consolidated NY-2


Top: The Navy’s most important trainer from the mid–1920s to the mid–1930s, this NY-1 is seen while attached to NAS HamptonRoads in 1929. The basic design of the NY was derived from the Army’s PT-1. Bottom: The NY-2 had added wingspan and a morepowerful J-5 engine. Most were assigned to NAS Pensacola. Note the Gosport tube connected to the face of the flight instructor inthe front cockpit.

fuselage framework of chrome- molydbenum steel tubing, wooden- framed wings using the new Clark Y thick- section air-foil, and metal N- type cabane and interplane struts. The re-sult—a durable and easy to maintain airframe with excellentflight characteristics—was ideal for a trainer.

In 1925 BuAer asked Consolidated to adapt the PT-1 tonaval specifications that included an air- cooled Wright J-4 pow-erplant and the ability to convert to either a wheeled or center -line float undercarriage. Fin and rudder area were increased ac-cordingly to offset the side area of the floats. After the Navyawarded a contract for 76 aircraft as the NY-1, the first produc-tion model (no experimental prototype) was flown on Novem -ber 12, 1925 and deliveries commenced in May 1926. In service,a number of these were re- designated NY-1A when retrofittedwith a flexible .30-cal. machine gun mount and used for gun nerytraining. Early operational experience with the NY-1 revealedthat in a float configuration, at gross weight, the aircraft sufferedfrom excessive wing- loading. In late 1926, to overcome theseshortcomings, Consolidated introduced the NY-2 having a 5-foot6-inch increase in wingspan and more power from a 220-hp J-5 engine. Following completion of successful trials in 1927, theNavy ordered 186 NY-2 production models (the largest trainerorder since 1918), all having been delivered by the end of 1928.

A further 25 NY-2s specifically outfitted for gunnery train-ing were ordered in 1928 as the NY-2A. The final 20 variantsbuilt, NY-3s with 240-hp Wright R-760-94 7-cylinder engines,went directly to various Navy and Marine reserve units as theywere delivered in 1929. In later service, NY-1s receiving thelarger wings of the -2 and 220-hp J-5 engines were returned toduty as the NY-1B. A single NY-2 airframe fitted with a WrightR-790-A engine was tested in 1929 as the XN3Y-1 but not

placed in production. From the late 1920s onward, NY variantsnot only established themselves as the Navy’s most importanttrainer for primary flight instruction and gunnery, but alsoformed a vital training component within the ten Navy and Ma-rine reserve units organized during 1928. NY-1Bs, -2s, and -2Bscontinued in service as the Navy’s most numerous type of pri-mary trainer until Naval Aircraft Factory N3N-1s began arrivingin quantity during 1936. All NY variants had been replaced attraining centers by the end of 1937, but the very last NY-3s werenot withdrawn from the reserves until 1939.

Atlantic (Fokker) TA/RA—1927

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TA-1)

Type: Ten- to fourteen- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Atlantic Aircraft Div., Fokker Aircraft Corp. of

America, Hasbrouck Heights, New Jersey.Total produced: 7 (USN,USMC).Powerplants: Three 220-hp Wright J-5 R-790 Whirlwind 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving two- bladed (2 outboard) and three- bladed (1 center) metal fixed- pitch propellers.



In the mid–1920s the Navy began evaluating the desira -bility of acquiring large commercial aircraft to be used as stafftransports and cargo carriers. Fokker, a company based in theNetherlands, was marketing its F.VII/3M, a tri- motor transportwhich had attracted much attention in the 1925 Ford ReliabilityTour and had also been selected by Cdr. Richard E. Byrd forthe North Pole over flight. Designed by Walter Rethel in 1924,


A Wright R-790 engine was the chief difference between the XN3Y-1 and the NY-2. Only one was built.

the F.VII series were high- wing mono-planes featuring a welded, steel tubefuselage and tailplane structure coveredin fabric with built- up wooden wingsskinned in a plywood veneer. The basicairframe could be ordered in either sin-gle or three- engine versions. So as toavoid Fokker’s wartime association withGermany, the company created anAmerican- registered subsidiary underthe name Atlantic Aircraft to reas sem -ble and deliver aircraft sold in theUnited States.

Following a 1926 Army order forthree F.VIIa/3Ms with widened fuse-lages and Wright J-5 engines as the C-2, the Navy contracted for three iden-tical aircraft under the transport desig-nation TA-1. When delivered in late1927 and early 1928, all three TA-1s weresubsequently assigned to VO-6M as partof the Second Marine Brigade inNicaragua. VO-6M also received twoTA-2s in 1928 which differed in having9 feet 6 inches added to wingspan.Sometime in 1930, the three TA-1s andtwo TA-2s were modified to accept in-stallation of 300-hp Wright J-6-9 en-gines and all returned to service as theTA-3. When Navy adopted the “R” fortransport designation in 1931, the TA-3sbecame RA-3s. In late 1930 and early1931, as the RA-4, the Navy evaluatedan Atlantic F.Xa that came with an 18-inch nose extension and three 450-hpPratt & Whitney Waspengines encased in ringcowls, but ultimatelyjudged the aircraft as un-suitable for service. TheRA-3s do not appear onMarine records after1932 and presumablyhad been withdrawn.


Atlantic TA-2

The Navy procured threeexamples of the TA-1 forthe Marines in 1927, allserving with VJ-6M inNicaragua. Atlantic wasan American-based sub-sidiary of Fokker, andthe design was based onthe Fokker V.VIIa/3mairliner.

Atlantic (Fokker) JA—1928TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XJA-1)

Type: Eight- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Atlantic Aircraft Div., Fokker Aircraft Corp. of

America, Hasbrouck Heights, New Jersey.Total produced: 1 (USN)

Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340B Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropeller.




Atlantic XJA-1

Another type of Atlantic- assembled, Fokker- designed transport to be considered bythe Navy, one single- engine F.VIII “Super Uni-versal” was delivered for evaluation in 1928 asthe XJA-1. Other than having a 20 percentsmaller airframe, the F.VIII was basically thesame in design and construction as the F.VIIseries. Following brief trials, naval officials de-cided against procurement and returned the air-craft to the manufacturer.

Ford JR/RR—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JR/RR-3)

Type: Eleven- to seventeen- place landplane trans-port.

Manufacturer: Stout Metal Airplane Div. of FordMotor Co., Dearborn, Michigan.

Total produced: 9 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Three 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-

88 Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooled radial enginedriving two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 135 mph at s.1.; ceiling18,000 ft.; range 505 mi.

Weights: 8,149 lbs. empty, 13,499 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 77 ft. 10 in., length 50 ft. 3 in.,


The origins of the famous Ford Trimotordate to 1925, when automaker Henry Ford anda group of investors acquired the Stout MetalAirplane Co. Using methods developed in Ger-many by Prof. Hugo Junkers, William B. Stoutpioneered the use of fully cantilevered, all- metal airframe structures that were skinned incorrugated duraluminum (see Stout ST, above).


The Fokker “Super Universal,” designated XJA-1, as seen at NAS Anacostia in 1928. Following brief trials, the aircraft was returnedto the manufacturer.

Ford JR-1

The new company’s first product, the 8-passenger Ford 4-AT,powered by three 200-hp Wright J-4 engines, made its firstflight in June 1926. Its high- wing aerodynamic configurationclosely resembled that of the Fokker F.VII/3M. On March 9,1927, following acceptance of the 4-AT into U.S. airline service,BuAer contracted to purchase the fourth aircraft on Ford’s pro-duction line under the designation XJR-1. The aircraft arrivedat NAS Anacostia In April 1928 and after about a year oftesting, the Navy ordered two improved 4- AT- Es, equipped with300-hp Wright J-6-9 engines, as the JR-2, which were both as-signed in 1929 to VJ-6M with the Second Marine Brigade inNicaragua.

Three Ford 5- AT- Cs, featuring a 3-foot 10-inch increase inspan, 450-hp Pratt & Whitney Wasp engines, and a 30 percentimprovement in useful load over the 4- AT- E, were purchasedin 1930, one being retained by the Navy to be used as a stafftransport at Pensacola and the other two going to VJ-6M. In1931, when the Navy adopted the “R” for transport designation,the type became RR-2s (note, the XJR-1 was damaged beyond

repair in 1930), the remaining Marine JR-3, the RR-3 (one JR-3 crashed in Nicaragua), and the Navy JR-2, the RR-4. TwoFord 5- AT- Ds, having uprated Wasp engines, entered servicein 1932 as RR-5s, one to the Navy and one to Marine squadronVJ-6M (later VMJ-1). All RRs were withdrawn from the navalinventory service by the end of 1937.

Fairchild JQ/ J2Q and R2Q—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XJQ-1)

Type: Five- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Fairchild Aircraft Mfg. Co., Farmingdale, New York.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 200-hp Wright R-790 J-5 Whirlwind 9-cylinder air-





Top: One of two JR-2s, improved Ford 4-AT-Es, ordered by the Navy in 1928 and assigned to Marine squadron VJ-6M when deliveredin 1929. Re-designated RR-2 in 1931 and withdrawn from service in 1935. Bottom: A Navy RR-3, one of three 5-AT-Cs acquired in1930 and re-designated RR-3 in 1931. This RR-3 served as a staff transport at NAS Pensacola while the other two were allocated tothe Marine squadron VJ-6M.


The XJQ-1 as seen at NAS Ana-costia in 1928 with originalWright J-5 engine. When fittedwith a P&W Wasp engine in1929, it became the XJ2Q-1, thenthe XR2Q-1 in 1931 under a newdesignation scheme.

Fairchild XJQ-1

The JQ and J2Q/R2Q were the same aircraftwith different engines. As part of its evaluation ofcivil transports, the Navy acquired one FairchildModel FC-2 in early 1928 as the XJQ-1. The FC-2was a high- wing, fabric covered monoplane designthat utilized a steel tube fuselage and strut- braced, built- up wooden wings, and the first type of aircraftto be produced by Fairchild in quantity. After a yearof trials at Anacostia, the aircraft was refitted with a450-hp Pratt & Whitney Wasp engine (though ap-parently not with the larger wings of the FC-2W)and re- evaluated as the XJ2Q-1. In 1931, it was re- designated XR2Q-1.

The FC-2 series evolved into the Model 71 man-ufactured by Fairchild Aircraft Ltd. of Canada,which went to gain wide popularity during the 1930sas a small transport and bush plane.

Boeing N2B—1928

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XN2B-1)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Boeing Airplane Co., Seattle, Washington.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 125-hp Fairchild- Caminez R-447 4-cylin-

der (crankless) air- cooled radial engine driving a four- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 104 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,500ft.; range 335 mi.


259 sq. ft.

A trainer competition conducted by BuAer in1928 resulted in delivery of prototypes by Boeing,Curtiss, and Keystone. Boeing’s entry, designatedthe XN2B-1, had originated in 1926 as the Wright J-3-powered Model 64, then reappeared in 1928 as theModel 81 with a Fairchild- Caminez powerplant. Thisunorthodox 4-cylinder engine was a crankless air- cooled radial that developed its peak horsepower atonly 1000 RPM and employed a high- pitched, four- bladed propeller to deliver thrust. The XN2B-1’s fabric- covered construction was mixed, consistingof a welded, steel tube fuselage and all- wood biplanewings using an NACA M-12 airfoil section. InitialNavy trials were unsatisfactory, however, and theprototype returned to Boeing to be fitted with a moreconventional 165-hp Wright J-6-5 (5-cylinder R-540)engine. Despite better performance in 1929 Navy tri-als, no production was ordered, and the sole XN2B-1


XN2B-1, after installation of more conventionalWright R-540 engine, was returned to Anacostia in1929 for a new series of trials, but no productionresulted. Aircraft was sold back to Boeing.

Boeing XN2B-1

eventually sold back to Boeing for use in itsschool of aeronautics.

Curtiss N2C Fledgling—1928TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (N2C-2)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane Co., Buffalo and

Garden City, New York.Total produced: 52 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 240-hp Wright R-760-94 7-cylin-

der air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.


Weights: 2,138 lbs. empty, 2,860 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 39 ft. 5 in., length 27 ft. 5 in.,


Winner of BuAer’s 1928 trainer compe-tition, the Curtiss XN2C-1 (Model 48) beganas a joint project with the Model 51 Fledglingto develop both a military prototype and a civiltrainer to be used in the nationwide schoolsoperated by Curtiss- Wright Flying Service.The new Curtiss Challenger twin- row, 6-cylinder radial was to power the civil model,while BuAer specified a more conventionalWright J-5 engine for its prototype. Construc-tion consisted of a welded, steel tube fuselageand tailplane with built- up wooden wings. Itsaerodynamic design was somewhat behind thetimes, appearing with thin- section wings thatwere braced by two bays of struts. Followingevaluations in both landplane and floatplaneconfigurations, Curtiss received a contract tobuild 31 production models as the N2C-1. In1929, shortly after production of the J-5 enginehad been discontinued, the Navy gave Curtissa follow- up order for 20 aircraft tobe powered by the 240-hp WrightJ-6-7 (R-760-94) under the desig-nation N2C-2.

As deliveries were completedin 1928 and 1929, most N2C-1s and-2s went directly to recentlyformed Navy and Marine reserveunits as training aircraft. From 1931to 1933, three N2C-2s served withMarine squadron VJ-6M in Nica -ragua and Quantico and anotherwith VJ-7M at San Diego. By


Curtiss N2C-2

The original XN2C-1 prototypeseen in the mid–1930s serving withthe reserves at NRAB New York.This type saw use in reserve pilottraining up to 1940.

mid–1937, a total of 37 N2C-1sand -2s were still listed as oper-ating with 11 different Navy andMarine reserve units, however, allhad been withdrawn from serviceby the end of 1939. At the veryend of their career, two N2C-2swere modified with tricycle land-ing gear and used as radio- controlled drones to simulate dive- bombing attacks on ships.

Keystone NK—1928TECHNICAL SPECIFICA-TIONS (NK-1)

Type: Two- place landplane/ floatplane trainer.

Manufacturer: Keystone Aircraft Corp., Bristol, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 19 (USN)Powerplant: One 220-hp Wright J-5 R-790 9-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal pro-peller.


Weights: 2,050 lbs. empty, 2,658 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 37 ft., length 26 ft. 6 in., wing area (not re-

ported).

Developed in parallel with the civil model “Pup,”Keystone delivered three essentially identical XNK-1trainer prototypes to NAS Anacostia in 1928 to be evalu-ated alongside the XN2B-1 and XN2C-1 (see above).BuAer subsequently gave Keystone a contract for 16 NK-1 production models, but the expected delivery in 1929was delayed due to modifications suggested by continuedtesting of the XNK-1s. When delivered in 1930, the pro-duction NK-1s differed in having an enlarged and reshapedfin and rudder, plus a small amount of dihedral added tothe horizontal stabilizer. Eventual use and disposition ofthese trainers is not clear, but they were apparently neverassigned to any regular training or reserve units.

Consolidated (Fleet) N2Y—1929

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (N2Y-1 PRODUCTION)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Fleet Div. of Consolidated Aircraft Corp.,

Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 6 (USN)Powerplant: One 115-hp Kinner K-5 R-372 5-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal pro-peller.


Keystone XNK-1

One of three XNK-1s delivered to NAS Anacostia in 1928,to be considered along with the XN2B-1 and XN2C-1.Although 16 more were purchased in 1930, they were notassigned to the training establishment.



area 194 sq. ft.

In 1929 and 1930, the Navy evaluatedtwo “lightweight” biplane trainers that wereboth based on preexisting civil designs. Thefirst, delivered in 1929 as the ConsolidatedXN2Y-1 with a 110-hp Warner Scarab engine,was the initial production version of the FleetModel 1, which itself had been derived fromthe Consolidated Model 14 “Husky Junior”of 1928. Fleet had been created in 1929 as adivision of Consolidated to manufacturesmall sport planes and trainers and in 1930,expanded its operations into Ontario as Fleet

Aircraft of Canada, Ltd. As delivered, the XN2Y-1 pos sessedan unusual “bathtub” cockpit having no structure betweenthe front and rear seats. Construction was comprised of awelded, steel tube fuselage, built- up wings with woodenspars and duraluminum ribs, and fabric covering.

Though not selected as a primary trainer, BuAer nev-ertheless ordered five Kinner- powered Fleet Model 2s asthe N2Y-1 to serve as familiarization trainers for the “sky-hook” pilots assigned to the rigid airships Akron and Macon(see Curtiss F9C, above). The Army also purchased 16 Fleet2s as the PT-6. Production N2Y-1s came with separate cock-pits and a streamlined fairing over the engine crankcase.One of these, fitted with a skyhook to engage the airship’s“trapeze” system, was re- designated XN2Y-2. After Akronand Macon were lost, two N2Y-1s were placed in storage atNAF and two others fitted with tailhooks served with theutility units aboard Saratoga and Ranger until 1937. TheXN2Y-2 was transferred to the Pennsylvania Aircraft Syn-dicate in 1934 to become the basis for the XOZ-1 autogiro(see above).

Loening HL—1930 see Loening OL underOBSERVATION AND SCOUT AIRCRAFT

New Standard NT—1930

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NT-1)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Standard Aircraft Corp, Paterson, New Jersey.Total produced: 6 (USN, USCG)Powerplant: One 100-hp Kinner K-5 R-372 5-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 99 mph at s.1.; ceiling 10,000 ft.; range

300 mi.Weights: 1,097 lbs. empty, 1,632 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 30 ft., length 24 ft. 11 in., wing area 248 sq. ft.


One of five N2Y-1s ordered in 1929 with revised cockpit configuration. N2Y-1s werelater fitted with “skyhooks” to be used as familiarization trainers in dirigible hook-on operations.

Consolidated N2Y-1

The second “lightweight”trainer tested, six New StandardModel D-29As acquired by theNavy in 1930 were subsequentlytaken into the naval inventory asthe NT-1. Slightly larger than theN2Y, The NT-1’s fabric- coveredairframe featured the typical built- up wooden wings and avery robust fuselage fabricated

from riveted and bolted duraluminum girders. The six aircraftalso came with the odd bathtub- type cockpits, but were latermodified with more conventional separate enclosures. Aftertesting, the NT-1s were assigned to the Naval Aircraft Factory,one on flight status with VX-3D4 and the others in storage.

In 1934, two New Standard D-25As that had been confis-cated from whiskey smugglers by the Treasury Departmentwere assigned to the Coast Guard under the designation NT-2. They were not derivatives of the NT-1 but a somewhat largerbiplane design, with a sesquiplane wing layout and a 225-hpWright J-6-7 engine. Both aircraft were lost in crashes during1935.

Douglas RD Dolphin—1931

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (RD-4)

Type: Eight- place utility transport and rescue amphibian.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica, California.Total produced: 59 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplants: Two 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-96 Wasp 9-cylin-

der air- cooled radial engines driving a two- bladed, groundadjustable metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 147 mph; ceiling 14,900 ft.; range 660 mi.Weights: 6,467 lbs. empty, 9,737 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 60 ft. 10 in., length 45 ft. 3 in., wing area 592 sq.

ft.

Completed in July 1930 as the non- amphibious Sinbadunder civil registration NX145Y, Douglas’s first in- house sea-plane design was initially conceived as a “flying yacht” to beoffered on the civilian market. The Sinbad appeared as amonoplane having an all- metal hull of semi- monocoque con-struction and a two- spar cantilevered wing covered inplywood that featured slotted, Handley Page- type ailerons.In original configuration, the 300-hp Wright J-5C Whirlwindengines were mounted directly above the wing and encasedin nacelles that blended in with its upper surface. After flight- testing revealed the need to raise the thrust line, the engineswere moved above the wing on struts, along with an auxiliaryairfoil mounted between the conical engine nacelles to add


The Navy purchased six NewStandard D-29As as the NK-1,one of several “lightweight”trainers tested in 1930. Very sim-ilar in design to the N2Y-1, theywere afterward assigned to NAF.

New Standard NT-1

structural support and lift. When no civilian buyers surfaced,the Sinbad was sold to the Coast Guard in March 1931 for$31,500, where it was operated for a period of time as call- sign“24 G” without a military designation but later simply listedas the “RD” with no numeric suffix.

The improved civil Dolphin, equipped with amphibiouslanding gear, a modified hull, and uprated engines, emerged inearly 1931, and later the same year, BuAer purchased one ex-

ample powered by 350-hp Wright R-975-3 Whirlwind enginesand placed it in service as the XRD-1. Twenty- three more Dol-phins variants were procured for the Navy and the Coast Guardbetween 1932 and 1934: three RD-2s in early 1933, two deliveredto the Navy and one to the Coast Guard, powered by 450-hpPratt & Whitney R-1340-10 engines; six very similar RD-3s inmid–1933 to the Navy; and ten RD-4s in late 1934 to the CoastGuard, powered by 450-hp R-1340-96 engines. One of the Navy


Douglas RD-4

RD-2s was specially outfitted for President Franklin D. Roo-sevelt, but there is no record of it ever having been used forsuch purpose. Navy RDs were typically assigned to utilitysquadrons and used primarily as transports, whereas CoastGuard versions saw extensive service in the search and rescuerole as flying lifeboats. Two RD-3s were subsequently assigned

to the Marine Corps to be used as utility transports. OneDolphin manufactured as an RD-2 but not placed on the navalinventory was used as a government transport by the Secretaryof the Treasury until 1937. Two Navy RD-3s and four CoastGuard RD-4s were still listed as active in December 1941.


Top: The Sinbad prototype after being modified and sold to the Coast Guard in 1931. In its original configuration as NX145Y, theengines had been mounted directly above the wings in streamlined nacelles. Bottom: One of two RD-2s ordered by the Navy in 1932.This example entered service in 1933 with the Utility Unit based at Coco Solo in the Canal Zone.

Lockheed RO—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XRO-1)

Type: Three or four- place landplane staff transport.Manufacturer: Lockheed Aircraft Div. of Detroit Aircraft

Corp., Burbank, California and Detroit, Michigan.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 645-hp Wright R-1820-E Cyclone 9-cylin-

der air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 209 mph at 7,000 ft.: ceiling23,800 ft.; range 580 mi.


293 sq. ft.

In October 1931, under the designation XRO-1,the Navy accepted delivery of one Lockheed Altairto be used as a personal transport for the AssistantSecretary of the Navy (David Ingalls). It was the firstNavy aircraft of any type to possess fully retractablelanding gear (preceding the Grumman XFF-1, re-ported above, by a couple of months). Designed byGerald Vultee, the Altair was a retractable gear de-velopment of the fixed- gear Sirius first flown in 1928.Altairs, one of the most aerodynamically clean de-signs of the period, were typically constructed ofwood, however, the DL-2 version sold to the Navydiffered in having the all- metal, semi- monocoquefuselage seen on the Sirius 8.

The XRO-1 was based at NAS Anacostia duringits term of service.

Curtiss JC/RC—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (RC-1)

Type: Eight- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co., Garden

City, New York.


The DL-2 version of Altair with a metal fuselage, placed on the inventory in October 1931 as the XRO-1 for the personal use ofAssistant Secretary of the Navy David Ingalls.

Lockheed XRO-1


Only example of a military “Kingbird,” the sole RC-1 was delivered to the Marines in 1931 to used as a utility transport and airambulance. Assigned initially to VF-9M in Quantico, then to VF-7M in San Diego until 1936.

Curtiss RC-1

Total produced: 1 (USMC)Powerplant: Two 300-hp Wright J-6-9 (R-975) Whirl-

wind 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 138 mph at s.1.: ceiling 16,500ft.; range 455 mi.


area 327 sq. ft.

The Curtiss Model 55 “Kingbird,” a twin- engine derivative of the Thrush, initially enteredservice with Eastern Air Transport in 1929 as asmall airliner. Its most noticeable charac teristicswere a twin- finned, biplane empennage and strut- mounted engine nacelles that placed the propellerarcs in front of the aircraft’s blunt nose. The Navypurchased a single Model 55 in March 1931 as theJC-1, but placed it into service as the RC-1. Fol-lowing delivery, the aircraft was assigned to theMarines, serving with VF-9M at Quantico for twoyears, then transferring to VJ-7M at San Diego,where it was employed as a transport and air am-bulance until the middle of 1936.

Bellanca RE/JE—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XRE-1)

Type: Six- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Bellanca Aircraft Corp., New Castle,

Delaware.Total produced: 4 (USN,USMC)Powerplant: One 420-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-C

Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine drivinga two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 155 mph at s.1.: ceiling 17,300ft.; range 670 mi.


area 255 sq. ft.

The Navy acquired threecivil Bellanca Model CH-400“Skyrockets” during 1932that were placed in service asthe XRE-1, -2, and -3, respec-tively. Giuseppe M. Bellanca,beginning with his Air Sedanof 1922, had evolved a suc-cessful series of commercial high- wing mono planes (WB/CH-200, -300, and -400) that


This XJE-3, one of three Bel-lanca CH-400s procured bythe Navy in 1933, was as -signed to VJ-6M at MCASQuantico, where it was usedas an air ambulance until1938.

Bellanca XRE-2

enjoyed reputations as good load carriers with excellentrange. The hallmarks of Bellanca’s monoplane designs werea boxy, humped fuselage to accommodate passengers orcargo, broad- chord wings with tapered tips, and large, airfoilsection wing struts that added to overall lift. Following officialacceptance, the XRE-1 and -2 were retained as NAS Anacostiaas utility transports and testbeds for radio equipment untilbeing withdrawn during the late 1930s. The XRE-3 was as-signed to Marine squadron VJ-6M (later VMJ-1) at Quanticoand used there as a two- litter air ambulance until 1938.

In 1938, under the designation JE-1, the Navy procureda single Bellanca Model 31-42 “Super Skyrocket” to serve asa utility transport at NAS Lakehurst in New Jersey. Poweredby a 570-hp R-1340-27, the larger JE was characterized byenlarged fin and rudder area, cantilevered landing gear, anda close- fitting bump cowling. This aircraft was listed as stillactive at NAS New York in December 1941.

Consolidated N4Y—1932TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (USN XN4Y-1)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Consolidated Aircraft Corp., Buffalo, New York.Total produced: 4 (USN/USCG)Powerplant: One 220-hp Lycoming R-680 7-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 118 mph at s.1.: ceiling 13,700 ft.; range

(not reported).Weights: 1,918 lbs. empty, 2,585 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 31 ft. 7 in., length 26 ft. 11 in., wing area 280 sq.

ft.

Representing a significant aerodynamic improvementover the earlier NY and PT-1/-3 series, the ConsolidatedModel 21 first appeared in 1931 as the Army Y1PT-11, poweredby a 165-hp Wright J-6-5 (5-cylinder R-540) engine. A singleJ-6-5-powered Model 21-A purchased by BuAer in 1932 en-


One of three Lycoming-powered XN4Y-1s acquiredfor evaluation in 1934.After the Navy decided toprocure N3N-1s in quantity,the XN4Y-1s were assignedto the training establish-ment at NAS Pensacola.

Consolidated N4Y-1

tered service with the Coast Guard at Cape May, New Jerseywithout any assigned designation. This aircraft, used for generaltraining duties until late 1941, was afterward refitted with a 220-hp Lycoming R-680 engine and given the designation N4Y-1.In 1934 BuAer acquired three Lycoming- powered variants(Identical to the Army PT-11D) for evaluation as the XN4Y-1and assigned them to the VD-2D8 training unit at NAS Pen-sacola. In the interval, however, naval officials had decided to re- equip the training establishment with NAF- built N3Ns, withthe consequence that no further production of the N4Y-1 wasordered.

Grumman JF/J2F Duck—1933

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JF-1 [J2F-5])

Type: Four- to five- place utility amphibian.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp., Bethpage,

New York.Total produced: 626 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 700-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-62 Twin

Wasp 14-cylinder [850-hp Wright R-1920-50 9-cylinder] air- cooled radial engine driving a three- bladed, groundadjustable [variable- pitch] metal propeller.

Armament: One (two on J2F-2A) flexible .30-caliber machinegun in the rear cockpit [and one fixed .30-calibermachine gun in the nose] and up to 200 lbs. [650 lbs.(400 lbs. on J2F-2A)] of bombs carried on underwingracks.

Performance: Max. speed 168 mph [188 mph]; ceiling 18,000ft. [27,000 ft.]; range 686 mi. [780 mi.].

Weights: 3,700 lbs. [4,300 lbs.] empty, 5,399 lbs. [6,711 lbs.]loaded.

Dimensions: Span 39 ft., length 33 ft. [34 ft. 0 in.], wing area409 sq. ft.

Like the Loening “Shoehorns” with which Grum-man had been closely associated, the JF/J2F series wereamphibians in which the fuselage structure formed anintegral part of the main pontoon. In 1931 BuAer askedGrumman to initiate a study for an amphibian designedto the Navy’s new “utility” category, which specifiedthat the aircraft also be capable of operating from anaircraft carrier. After reviewing Grumman’s proposalfor the model G-7, BuAer awarded the company a con-tract in late 1932 for construction of a prototype underthe designation XJF-1. Not surprisingly, the design com-bined the shoehorn outline of Loening’s OL series withthe more modern aerodynamic and structural featuresof the FF-1. Along with Grumman’s already proven gearretraction system, drag was minimized by utilizing all- metal, semi- monocoque construction methods tostreamline the junctions between the fuselage and themain float. The single- bay biplane wings and all move-able control surfaces were conventional metal- framedstructures with fabric covering.

The first flight of the XJF-1 took place on April 25,1933, near the Grumman factory in Farmingdale, andit was delivered to Naval Air Station Anacostia in Mary-

land for military trials on May 4. As originally built, the tailgroup of the XJF-1 was similar in size and shape to that of theFF-1, but after early testing revealed stability problems, all ver-tical and horizontal tail surfaces were reshaped and enlarged.Following official acceptance, the Navy placed an order for twenty- seven production models to be delivered as the JF-1.The only noticeable difference between the production JF-1 andthe prototype was the rounded fin and rudder shape that becamestandard throughout the series. As JF-1s began entering servicein late 1934, they replaced Loening OL-9s aboard the Navy’s


Grumman J2F-5

four carriers, and as deliveries proceeded,began replacing older observation and tor-pedo types in utility (VJ) squadrons; and be-tween 1936 and 1939, four of these weretransferred to the Marine Corps. Thefourteen JF-2s ordered by the Coast Guardin early 1934 differed in having single- row750-hp Wright R-1820-20 Cyclone enginesthat came with ring- type cowlings and a direction- finding loop antenna behind thecanopy. Initial deliveries of JF-2s com -menced later the same year, and onDecember 4, 1934, a USGC JF-2 establisheda new amphibian world speed record of 191mph. One of the last JF-2s produced was re-assigned to the Marines and entered servicewith VJ-6M at Quantico, Virginia in late1935. The last of the JF series, five Cyclone- powered JF-3s completed in late 1935, camewithout carrier arresting gear and were de-livered directly to naval reserve units.

Grumman began design work on the im-proved model G-15 in 1935, and in March1936, BuAer ordered twenty production air-craft as the J2F-1. Powered by the same R-1820-20 engine as the JF-2, changes includeda lengthening of the main float with accom-modation for an additional crewmember ora medical stretcher in the compartment belowthe cockpit, removal of the inter- aileronstruts, and a strengthening of the airframe toallow catapult launches from ships. The firstJ2F-1 was flown on April 3, 1937, and all hadbeen delivered to Navy and Marine units bythe end of the year. To keep pace with thegeneral expansion of the fleet, BuAer orderedfour more batches of J2Fs from Grumman in1937 and 1938, which all entered service dur-ing 1939: twenty- one J2F-2s equipped with790-hp R-1820-30 engines and one fixed .30-caliber machine gun firing between cylin -ders; nine J2F-2As for the Marines that fea-tured two additional bomb racks and twin


Left, top: The XJF-1 prototype in 1933 follow-ing enlargement of vertical fin. Productionmodels came with the rounded fin and rudderand a shorter chord cowling. Middle: One of14 JF-2s accepted by the Coast Guard in 1934and 1935. The aircraft shown (V148) was ini-tially based at CGAS Port Angeles in Wash-ington state. Bottom: The J2F-1 depicted herewas delivered to the Marine Corps at MCASQuantico in June 1938, where it served withutility squadron VMJ-1. The Marines alsooperated several more JFs and J2Fs at otherstations.

machine gun mounts in the rear cockpit;twenty J2F-3s specially outfitted to serve asVIP transports; and thirty- two J2F-4s that dif-fered from -2s only in minor details.

With war clouds on horizon, BuAerplaced an order with Grumman in early 1940for 144 J2F-5s, and deliveries started beforethe end of the year. J2F-5s were powered by850-hp R-1820-50 engines, upping top speedby 10 mph, and could be distinguished by their full- chord cowlings. At some point duringJ2F-5 production the airplane acquired thename “Duck.” As of December 1941, over 200JF and J2F variants were active with the Navy,Marines, and Coast Guard. During WorldWar II, with Grumman’s production lines atcapacity producing fighters and torpedobombers, license- production of the J2F wasshifted to the Columbia Aircraft Corp. at Val-ley Stream, New York, and from mid–1942 tolate 1945, a further 330 Ducks were com -pleted there as the J2F-6 (initially designatedJL-1). J2F-6s were identical to -5s except fora 1,050-hp R-1820-54 engines and constant- speed propellers.

Curtiss R4C—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R4C-1)

Type: Sixteen- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Curtiss Airplane Div. of Curtiss-

Wright Corp., St. Louis, Missouri.Total produced: 2 (USN/USMC)Powerplants: Two 720-hp Wright R-1820-F Cy-

clone 9-cylinder air- cooled radial enginesdriving three- bladed variable- pitch metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 190 mph:ceiling 23,000 ft.; range 716 mi.

Weights: 12,235 lbs. empty, 17,500lbs. gross.

Dimensions: Span 82 ft. 0 in., length48 ft. 7 in., wing area 1,208 sq.ft.

In 1934, for general trans-portation duties, the Navy ac-quired two late- production CurtissAT-32E Condor II airliners, whichentered service under the desig-nation R4C-1. The AT-32 differedfrom the earlier T-32 in having full- chord cowlings rather thandrag rings and variable- pitch pro-pellers instead of fixed units, andthe number “32” related to thetype’s 3,200-lb. payload capacity.Despite being biplanes of mixed,


The first of two R4C-1s ordered for the Marines in 1934. This aircraft was assigned initially toVJ-7M in San Diego. In 1940 both R4C-1s were equipped with skis and transferred to the U.S.Antarctic Expedition.

Curtiss R4C-1

fabric- covered construction in an age of all- metalmonoplane airliners like the Boeing 247 and DouglasDC-2, some 30 Condors IIs had been placed in serviceduring 1933 and 1934 by American Airlines and East-ern Air Transport as overnight “sleeper” transports,where the type’s spacious, 12-berth cabin was consid-ered more important than its 155 mph cruising speed.

The first R4C-1, delivered in June 1934, was as-signed to Marine squadron VJ-6M in Quantico, Vir-ginia. In similar fashion, the second example, arrivingthe following November, went to VJ-7M in San Diego,California, then in late 1935, when VJ-6M receivedtwo Douglas R2D-1s (DC-2s), its R4C-1 transferredto VJ-7M (became VMJ-1 in 1937). After leaving Ma-rine service in 1940, the two aircraft were equippedwith skis and attached to the U.S. Antarctic Expe -dition, and reportedly left behind when the expeditionreturned in 1941.

Waco JW—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XJW-1)

Type: Three- place landplane trainer and utility aircraft.Manufacturer: Waco Aircraft Co., Troy, Ohio.Total produced: 2 (USN)Power plant: One 210-hp Continental R-670 7-cylinder air-

cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitchmetal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 132 mph: ceiling (not reported);range 400 mi.


296 sq. ft.

The last two of 18 UBF-2 sport biplanes built byWaco were purchased by the Navy in 1934 under thedesignation XJW-1. After being assigned to the rigidairship Macon HTA unit, both aircraft were fitted with


One of two XJW-1s acquired in 1934 as hook-on trainers for the airship Macon. They also were used as aerial couriers between theairship and the ground. One was lost with Macon, and the survivor was sent to NAS Anacostia.

Waco XJW-1

a “skyhook” arresting system to operate as hook- on trainers for pilots as well as carry-ing mail and passengers to and from the air-ship. Following the loss of Macon in 1935,the surviving XJW-1 was attached to VX-4D5 at NAS Anacostia and remained inservice there until late 1941.

Douglas R2D—1934

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R2D-1)

Type: Seventeen- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Mon-

ica, California.Total produced: 5 (USN/USMC)Powerplants: Two 750-hp Wright R-1820-12 Cy-

clone 9-cylinder air- cooled radial enginesdriving three- bladed variable- pitch metalpropellers.

Performance: Max. speed 210 mph: ceiling22,450 ft.; range 1,200 mi.


area 939 sq. ft.

The Douglas DC-1, flown for the firsttime in July 1933, followed 10 months laterby the definitive DC-2 production model,shifted the paradigm in air travel by offeringcommercial operators a combination ofspeed, payload, and range that would enablethem—for the first time—to carry passen-gers at a profit without reliance on air mailcontract subsidies. Motivated by the desireto create an aircraft that could effectivelycompete for airline routes against Boeing’snew Model 247, the Douglas engineeringteam led by Arthur Raymond had evolveda highly advanced low- wing monoplane de-sign that utilized multi- cellular wing con-struction allowing the main spars to runbelow the floorboard. Other innovations in-cluded a twin- strut, knee- action main land-ing gear retraction system, split flaps thatlowered takeoff and landing speeds, and an all- aluminum alloy structure throughout ex-cept for fabric- covered control surfaces.More importantly, compared to the Model247, the DC-2 cruised 14 mph faster, 500miles further, with four more passengers.

In 1934, out of a desire to replace itsobsolescent Ford RRs (tri- motors) withmore up- to- date equipment, BuAer orderedfive DC-2s from Douglas in two batchesunder the designation R2D-1. The first three(DC-2-125s) were accepted in late 1934, twoof which were assigned to NAS Anacostia


On of three DC-2-125s accepted during late 1934, this R2D-1 was assigned to VJ-6Mat MCAS Quantico to be used as a staff transport. Of the five R2D-1s ultimately pro-cured, three were allocated to the Marines.

Douglas R2D-1

as staff transports and the other to Quan-tico with Marine squadron VJ-6M. Twoimproved DC-2-142s (increased fin areaand small interior variations) were deliv-ered in 1935, one entering service withVJ-5 at NAS San Diego and the secondwith VJ-6M (became VMJ-2 in 1937).The USMC R2D-1s were later used toconduct the first Marine paratrooper ex-periments. By the end of 1941, two R2D-1shad been removed from the naval inven-tory, two were based at NAS Pen sacola,and one remained with the Marines at SanDiego.

Franklin PS-2—1934TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (PS-2)

Type: One- place training glider.Manufacturer: Franklin Glider Co., (location

unknown).Total produced: 6 (USN)Powerplant: None.Performance: Max. speed (not reported); glide

ratio 15:1.Weights: Empty (not reported), 400 lbs.

loaded.Dimensions: Span 36 ft., length (not re ported),


In 1934 the Navy acquired six one- seat Franklin PS-2 (primary- secondary- two) gliders to evaluate the possibility ofincorporating them into the pilot trainingprogram. No naval designation was everassigned. Designed to withstand the rigorsof training, the PS-2 featured a welded,steel tube fuselage and tail group, built- up wooden wings braced by struts, and a mono- wheel landing gear. After officialevaluations, the gliders were as-signed to NAS Pensacola, wherethey operated until sometime in1938. At least one PS-2 wastransferred to NACA at Langley,Virginia, for ground effect tests.


A very modern glider in its day,the Navy acquired six of these PS-2s and operated them at NASPensacola to evaluate the feasibil-ity of using them as part of a pilottraining program.

Franklin PS-2

Stinson R3Q (RQ)—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XR3Q-1)

Type: Six- place landplane staff transport.Manufacturer: Stinson Aircraft Corp., Northville, Michigan.Total produced: 2 (USN, USCG)Powerplant: One 225-hp Lycoming R-680-6 7-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 133 mph at s.1.: ceiling 15,500 ft.; range 550

miles.

Weights: 2,250 lbs. empty, 3,550 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 41 ft., length 27 ft. 3 in., wing area 230 sq. ft

The Navy purchased one Stinson SR-5A in 1934 under thedesignation XR3Q-1 and thereafter assigned it as a utility trans-port at NAS Sunnyvale (later renamed Moffett Field) in Cali-fornia. Stinson’s SR “Reliant” series, fabric- covered high- wingmonoplanes characterized by clean lines, cantilevered landinggear, and close- fitting bump cowlings, had gained wide popu-


Stinson R3Q-1


larity as personal and executive transports in the United States,with about 250 having been sold by 1934. A second SR-5A ac-quired in 1935 went into service with the Coast Guard at FloydBennett Field in Brooklyn, New York, initially as the RQ-1 butlater changed to XR3Q-1 to conform with its Navy counterpart.This aircraft was used to test electronic equipment until 1939,when it was transferred to the Air Patrol Detachment at CapeMay, New Jersey. Both XR3Q-1s had been stricken from theinventory by the end of 1941.

Naval Aircraft Factory N3N—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (N3N-3)

Type: Two- place landplane/floatplane trainer.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 998 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 235-hp Wright R-760-2 (J-6-7) 7-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.Performance: Max. speed 126 mph at s.1.: ceiling 15,200 ft.; range 470

miles.Weights: 2,090 lbs. empty, 2,940 lbs. loaded (with floats).Dimensions: Span 34 ft., length 25 ft. 6 in., wing area 305 sq. ft.

The N3N was a byproduct of the Vinson- Trammel Act of1934, which, among other things, directed the Navy to generateat least 10 percent of its aircraft from the government- ownedNaval Aircraft Factory. With this in mind, BuAer issued a re-quirement in October 1934 for NAF to design and develop aprimary trainer that would replace the Navy’s existing fleet ofConsolidated NYs in both training centers and reserve units.The requirement, in addition to being convertible to wheel orfloat undercarriage, specified that the new aircraft have “max-imum ruggedness and ease of maintenance,” plus the “gen-eral stability for primary training purposes.” Soon afterward,BuAer awarded NAF a contract to construct one aircraft as theXN3N-1, to be followed by 45 production models, with the un-derstanding the prototype would be ready for testing by late1935.

While the general aerodynamic design of the XN3N-1 wastypical of opencockpit, fabric- covered biplanes of the day, itsstructural features were more innovative: a fuselage built- upof riveted aluminum extrusions rather than welded, steel tubing,an all- aluminum semi- monococque tail group, and wings madeup of extruded aluminum I- beams and stamped aluminum ribs.For ready access to the interior, the left side of the fuselage in-corporated three removable panels. On August 23, 1935, severalmonths ahead of schedule, the XN3N-1 was rolled out for itsfirst flight. Early air testing, however, revealed a serious amountof tail heaviness coupled with difficulty recovering from spins.Evaluating officials also expressed concern over the lack of for-ward crash protection and the danger presented by the midshipslocation of the fuel tanks. As a result, the engine mount wasextended to shift the center of gravity forward, the stabilizerrevised and rudder area increased to improve spin recovery,and the main fuel tanks relocated to the upper wings. Althoughthe changes did not completely resolve all stability and controlproblems, BuAer nonetheless increased the order to 85 aircraft,and the first production N3N-1 completed acceptance trials atNAS Anacostia in mid–1936.

Through the course of 1936, as N3N-1 deliveriesproceeded, NAF received two more production contracts, the

This Stinson SR-5A was placed on the Coast Guard inventoryin 1935 as the RQ-1 but subsequently changed to XR3Q-1 to con-form to the Navy SR-5A acquired in 1934. This aircraft wasassigned to Floyd Bennett Field, New York.

Naval Aircraft FactoryN3N-3

first 25 of which (as with the original 85) were to be poweredby 220-hp Wright R-790-8 9-cylinder engines and theremaining 80 by 235-hp Wright R-760-2 7-cylinder engines.Ten aircraft of the original order were subsequently cancelledso that 180 N3N-1s had been accepted when production endedin April 1938. All N3N-1s came with full- chord cowlings thatwere later removed. Continuing efforts by NAF to remedy theshortcomings of the N3N-1 resulted in the testing of the R-760-powered XN3N-2 during mid–1936. Despite further revisionsto the engine mount and the movement of certain equipmentforward, the XN3N-2 was judged not to offer much improve-ment over the -1 and never went into production.

In light of passage of the Naval Expansion Act of 1938and the unprecedented growth it portended for naval aviation(i.e., 3,000 new aircraft), NAF officials obtained approval fromBuAer to initiate a redesign program that would eliminate theN3N-1’s most serious flaws, and in June 1939, received acontract to manufacture 50 new aircraft as the N3N-3. OneN3N-1 returned to NAF where it was modified to incorporatea completely new tail group consisting of a larger, rounded finand rudder and a repositioned stabilizer, a single- strut landinggear (on the landplane version), and a new nose contour whichdispensed with a cowling. Other less visible improvements in-cluded changes to the controls and a strengthening of the air-


Top: The 180 N3N-1s produced between 1935 and 1938 represented an across-the-board replacement of the Navy’s trainer fleet. Full-chord cowling seen on this example was later removed. Bottom: N3N-3s began displacing -1s in the Naval Training Establishmentduring 1940, and a total of 816 had been delivered when production ceased in 1942.

frame. Flight- testing of the XN3N-3, completed by January1940 in both wheeled and float configurations, demonstratednot only excellent handling qualities but improved levels ofperformance that exceeded expectations. In May 1940, BuAerordered the N3N-3 into high- rate production, initially contract-ing for 500 aircraft and in September, upped the order to 816.NAF thereafter manufactured N3N-3s at a rate of about 50 air-craft per month, delivering the last examples in January 1942.

As N3N-3s arrived for service at NAS Pensacola and NASCorpus Christi, the two main primary flight- training centers,most N3N-1s were sent to the reserves or attached to bases forutility duties. N3N-3s also began displacing -1s in reserve units,and in 1941, four were assigned to the Coast Guard, and severalmore as tugs in the Marine glider training program. At the timethe U.S. entered World War II in December 1941, a total of 943N3Ns were listed on the naval inventory. After serving through-out the course of the war, most surviving N3Ns were sold sur-plus, however, the very last N3N-3s were not re-tired from operations at the Naval Academy until1961.

Boeing (Stearman) NS andN2S Kaydet—1935

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (N2S-3)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Stearman Aircraft Div. of Boeing Air-

plane Co., Wichita, Kansas.Total produced: 4,437 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 220-hp Continental R-670-5 7-cyl -

inder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden or metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 124 mph at s.1.: ceiling 11,200ft.; range 505 miles.


area 297 sq. ft.

In terms of numbers, the Stearman “Kaydet”series, became the Navy’s most important primarytrainer of the wartime period. Though not as ver-satile as the N3N, the Stearman Division ofBoeing nonetheless possessed the plant capacityto produce trainers in far greater numbers thanNAF. In 1934, the same year Stearman was ac-quired as a subsidiary of Boeing, the Model 70appeared as a private venture in a bid to replaceboth the Navy’s and the Army’s aging fleet ofConsolidated primary trainers (i.e., NY and PT-1,-3, and -11). BuAer responded first, ordering oneexample to be powered by a surplus 220-hpWright R-790-8 J-5 engine, which was deliveredin 1935 under the designation XNS-1. Followingtrials, Stearman received a contract to produce 61virtually identical aircraft as the NS-1, and nearlyall were placed in service at NAS Pensacoladuring 1935 and 1936 to augment N3N-1s. Mean-

while, from 1937 onwards, the 225-hp Lycoming R-680-powered Stearman Model 75 was placed in large- scale produc-tion for the Army as the PT-13, then in 1940, the 220-hp Con-tinental R-670-powered Model A75-N1 as the PT-17.

The next Navy order came in 1940 when BuAer procured250 Continental- powered PT-17 copies under the designationN2S-1, with deliveries being completed in 1941. Also acceptedduring 1941 were 125 Lycoming- powered variants specially out-fitted as instrument trainers (identical to PT-13C) that enteredservice as the N2S-2 plus 211 (out of 1,875 ordered) Continental- powered variants (same as PT-17) delivered as the N2S-3. Allof these aircraft were assigned to primary training centers,which by that time included NAS Jacksonville, Florida, as wellas NAS Pensacola and NAS Corpus Christi. A total of 616 Stearman- built trainers were in naval service by the end of 1941,and a further 3,821 N2S-3s, -4s (Continental R-670-5), and -5s (Lycoming R-680-17) would be delivered before the war


Stearman N2S-2

ended. Eleven N2S-3s were transferred to the Coast Guard fortraining purposes, and small numbers of different N2S variantsalso served with the Marines. Like the N3Ns, virtually all ofthe Navy N2Ss were sold surplus shortly after World War IIended.

Northrop RT—1935TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (RT-1)

Type: Eight- place landplane staff transport.Manufacturer: Northrop Corp. (Subsidiary of Douglas Aircraft Co.),

Inglewood, California.

Total produced: 1 (USCG)Powerplant: One 735-hp Wright R-1820-F52 Cyclone 9-cylinder air-

cooled radial engine driving a three- bladed variable- pitch metalpropeller.

Performance: Max. speed 219 mph at 6,300 ft.: ceiling 20,000 ft.;range 1,650 miles.


A single Northrop Delta 1-D executive transport was pro-cured for the Coast Guard in February 1935 and taken into serv-ice as the RT-1. It was an exceptionally clean low- wing mono-plane utilizing Northrop’s very advanced multi- cellular wing


Top: The Navy bought 61 NS-1s powered by surplus J-5 engines in 1935 to supplement its primary training fleet at NAS Pensacola,and 42 of them were still on hand at the end of 1941. Bottom: Burgeoning growth of naval pilot training from 1940 onwards compelledthe Navy to order the Army’s PT-13 (N2S-2) and PT-17 (N2S-1 through -5). It became the Navy’s most numerous wartime primarytrainer.

design and all- metal, stressedskin construction. Other note-worthy features included a fixedlanding gear encased in stream-lined spats and split landingflaps. After introducing the verysleek Delta in 1933, Northrop’splans to market it as a small air-liner were effectively frustratedby a 1934 federal regulation re-quiring multi- engine aircraft forairliner operations at night orover rough terrain. The RT-1,one of eight Delta 1-Ds ulti-mately completed by Northrop,while technically serving with

the Coast Guard, had actually been ac-quired for use as the personal stafftransport of then Secretary of the TreasuryHenry N. Morgenthau, Jr. The TreasuryDepartment ceased using this aircraftsometime during the late 1930s, after whichthe Coast Guard continued to operate it asa VIP transport until it was damaged be-yond economical repair in late 1940.

Kinner RK—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XRK-1)

Type: Four- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Kinner Airplane & Motor Corp.

(owned by Security- National AircraftCorp.), Downey, California.

Total produced: 3 (USN)Powerplant: One 300-hp Kinner C-7 (R-1044-

2) 7-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driv-ing a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal pro-peller.

Performance: Max. speed 171 mph; ceiling (notreported); range 700 mi.

Weights: 2,551 lbs. empty, 4,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 39 ft. 9 in., length 28 ft. 7

in., wing area 240 sq. ft.

The Kinner C-7 “Envoy” was flownfor the first time in 1934 as four- place out-growth of the company’s earlier two- seatB-2 “Sportster.” In general design, like theB-2, it appeared as a fabric- covered, low- wing monoplane with wire- braced wingsand spatted undercarriage, with the addedfeatures of a close- fitting bump cowlingand a noticeably raked forward wind screen.The Navy acquired three of these aircraftin 1936 under the designation XRK-1. Onewas assigned to the Inspector of Naval Air-craft at Santa Monica, California (where


This Northrop Delta 1-D was placed on the Coast Guard inventory in 1935 to serve as a personaltransport for the secretary of the Treasury. Used in the late 1930s as a USCG VIP transport.

Northrop RT-1

Douglas was located) and another to VJ-5 as a command trans-port for the commanding officer of NAS San Diego; dispositionof the third is not known. The XRK-1 based at San Diego waslater refitted with a 400-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985 engine andgiven a ring cowl and by the end of 1941, was the only exampleremaining in naval service.

Fairchild JK—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JK-1)

Type: Five- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corp., Hagerstown, Mary-

land.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 320-hp Wright R-760-6 7-cylinder air- cooled radial

engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.


The Navy procured three Kinner Envoys as the XRK-1 in 1936.The example shown had been assigned to the Inspector of NavalAircraft at the Douglas Plant in Santa Monica, California.

Kinner XRK-1

Sole Fairchild Model 45-A purchased as the JK-1 in 1936, as seenin 1939 at NRAB Oakland, California, after being assigned as astaff transport to serve the new air station under constructionin Alameda.

Fairchild JK-1

Performance: Max. speed 170 mph; ceiling 18,700ft.; range 650 mi.


area 248 sq. ft.

The Navy purchased one Fairchild Model45-A in 1936 which was taken into service as autility transport under the designation JK-1.Featuring mixed, fabric- covered constructionwith a fully cantilevered wing and tail group,plus retractable landing gear, the Model 45 hadbeen designed in 1934 as a executive transportthat would be marketed against single- engineaircraft like the cabin Waco and StinsonReliant, however, only a hand ful sold on thecivil market. Following official ac ceptance, theNavy’s JK-1 was given a blue- trimmed com-mand paint scheme and assigned to the Admi-ral’s staff at NAS Anacostia. By the time theU.S. entered World War II in December 1941,the aircraft had been transferred to general du-ties at NAS San Diego.

Fairchild R2K—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XR2K-1)

Type: Two- place landplane flying testbed.Manufacturer: Kreider- Reisner Div. of Fairchild En-

gine & Airplane Corp., Hagerstown, Maryland.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 145-hp Warner R-499 Super Scarab

7-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propeller.


Weights: 1,102 lbs. empty, 1,750 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 33 ft. 0 in., length 22 ft. 3 in.,


In 1931, following the acquisition of Kreider- Reisner Aircraft Corp., Fairchild intro-duced the two- place Model 22C series, whichwere parasolwing monoplanes of mixed con-struction, offered with a variety of different in-line and radial engines ranging from 75 to 145-hp. The first of eight Warner Super Scarab–powered 22C-7Fs appeared in 1933, and onewas purchased under USN registry in 1936 asthe XR2K-1 and thereafter used by NACA totest the full- span “Zap” flap system. Theaircraft was apparently disposed of once thetests were completed.


This Fairchild Model 22C-7F was placed on thenaval inventory in 1936 as the XR2K-1 but oper-ated by the National Advisory Committee onAeronautics (NACA) to test a full-span Zap flapsystem.

Fairchild XR2K-1

Fairchild J2K and GK—1936

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS(J2K-1)

Type: Four- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Fairchild Engine & Airplane

Corp., Hagerstown, Maryland.Total produced: 17 (USN, USCG)Powerplant: One 145-hp Ranger 6-410 6-

cylinder air- cooled inline enginedriving a two- bladed fixed- pitchwooden propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 138 mph; ceiling16,500 ft.; range 560 mi.

Weights: 1,560 lbs. empty, 2,550 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 36 ft. 4 in., length 24 ft.

10 in., wing area 173 sq. ft.

The Fairchild Model 24C originated in 1932as a two- seat, high- wing cabin adaptation of the parasolwing Model 22C, and as the type gainedpopularity (about 200 sold by 1935), evolved intoa three- seater powered by either a 145-hp Warnerradial (C8E) or 145-hp Ranger inline engine(C8F). Model 24s utilized the fabric- coveredconstruction typical for lightplanes of the day,with a welded, steel tube fuselage and built- upwooden wings and were characterized by a wide- stance main landing gear that tied in to the wingstruts. In 1936, two Model 24-C8Fs acquired forthe Coast Guard under the designation J2K-1were assigned as utility transports to the USCGair station at St. Petersburg, Florida, and in 1937,two more Model 24-Hs powered by 150-hpRanger engines, were added to the Coast Guardinventory as the J2K-2 and assigned to its air sta-tion at Charleston, South Carolina. All four ofthese aircraft were subsequently lost in crashes,the last occurring in mid–1940. In 1941, under thenew designation GK-1, BuAer awarded Fairchildcontracts for 13 Model 24W-40s (165-hp WarnerR-500), three examples having been accepted bythe end of the year.

Sikorsky JRS—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JRS-1)

Type: Twenty- one- place utilitytransport amphibian.Manufacturer: Sikorsky Aviation Div. of United Air-

craft Corp., Bridgeport, Connecticut.


One of two Fairchild Model 24-C8Fs purchasedby the Coast Guard in 1936 under the designationJ2K-1. Both aircraft were based at CGAS St.Petersburg, Florida. Model 24W-40s acquiredduring the war were GK-1s.

Fairchild J2K-1

Total produced: 17 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Two 750-hp Pratt &

Whitney R-1690-52 Hornet 9-cylinder air- cooled radial en-gines driving three- bladed, variable- pitch metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 194 mph,cruise 167 mph; ceiling 20,700ft.; range 775 mi.


Dimensions: span 86 ft. 0 in., length51 ft. 2 in., wing area 781 sq. ft.

The Sikorsky Model S-43was originally conceived to fulfilla Pan American Airways require-ment for a twin- engine amphibianthat would operate on secondaryLatin American routes. Flying forthe first time in mid–1935, the S-43 presented an innovative all- metal design that employed a single- step hull and a wing sup-

ported by a center pylon and N- struts. Wingflaps occupying forty- eight percent of the spanreduced stall speed to 65 mph, permitting take-offs and landings in relatively tight waterways.In 1937, when Sikorsky had sold over 20 ofthese transports to commercial users, BuAer or-dered the first of 17 S-43s accepted into serviceover the next two years as the JRS-1. Eight JRS-1s were ultimately assigned to VJ-1 in San Diegoand the remainder to various stations, includingone each to Marine squadron VMJ-1 (becameVMJ-153 in 1941) in San Diego and VMJ-2 (be-came VMJ-252) in Quantico. At the end of 1941,four JRS-1s remained active, three with VJ-1,which saw brief service afterward in coastal pa-trol, and one with VMJ-252, the only exampleto survive the war.

Lockheed R2O and R3O—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XR2O-1)

Type: Twelve- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Burbank,California.Total produced: 2 (USN, USCG)Powerplants: Two 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-13Wasp Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial enginesdriving two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propellers.Performance: Max. speed 202 mph at 5,000 ft.; ceil-ing 19,400 ft.; range 713 mi.Weights: 6,454 lbs. empty, 10,500 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 55 ft., length 38 ft. 7 in., wing area458 sq. ft.

The Model 10 “Electra,” designed by HallHibbard and flown for the first time in early


A Navy JRS-1, probably in 1937, shown before application of unit markings. The 15 Navy andtwo Marine Corps JRS-1s reportedly remained in service through the end of World War II.

Sikorsky JRS-1

1934, was Lockheed’s first all- metal aircraftand came into national attention in July 1937when the highly modified Model 10-E pilotedby aviatrix Amelia Earhart disappeared duringan attempted around- the- world flight. Mate-rializing as one of the most advanced aerody-namic concepts of its day, the Electra had beendesigned to operate on lower capacity airlineroutes alongside the Boeing 247 and DouglasDC-2. The Navy procured a Model 10-A, the fifty- second built, as the XR2O-1 in February1936, which was subsequently given a com-mand paint scheme and assigned to NAS Ana-costia for use by the Secretary of the Navyand his staff. The aircraft continued in thisrole through 1941.

In April 1936, a Lockheed Model 10-B, which differed from the A in having 440-hp Wright R-975-E3 engines, was added tothe Coast Guard inventory as the XR3O-1,but like the Northrop RT-1 reported above,placed in service as a personal transport forthe Secretary of the Treasury. It served inthis capacity until 1939, when it was trans-ferred to the Air Patrol Detachment in CapeMay, New Jersey, and later still, to theUSCG air station in Biloxi, Mississippi,where it served during World War II.

Waco J2W—1936TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (J2W-1)

Type: Four- place landplane/floatplane utilitytransport.

Manufacturer: Waco Aircraft Co., Troy, Ohio.Total produced: 3 (USCG)Powerplant: One 320-hp Wright R-760-E2 7-

cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 176 mph at s.1.; ceiling(not reported); range 550 mi.

Weights: 2,050 lbs. empty, 3,350 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 35 ft. 0 in., length 25 ft. 9 in.,


The Coast Guard acquired three WacoEQC-6s in 1936 under the designation J2W-1. Waco introduced the “Custom Cabin” linein the mid–1930s as a series of sesquiplanesavailable with a number of powerplant op-tions. The company’s unusual alpha- numeric designation system referenced the


Lockheed XR2O-1

A Lockheed Model 10-A Electra acquired inFebruary 1936 as the XR2O-1. After beingpainted in a command scheme, the aircraftwas assigned to NAS Anacostia for the useof the secretary of the Navy and his staff.

engine, type, series, and year of manufacture;thus, EQC-6 translated to E = Wright R-760,Q = cabin biplane, C = custom cabin series,and -6 = 1936. Cabin Wacos were fabric- covered biplanes, typically constructed withsteel tube fuselage frames and built- up woodenwings. The Coast Guard’s three J2W-1s wereinitially employed for a variety of duties andone (V159) was variously rigged with floats andskis for operations out of Cordova, Alaska.After being assigned to the Air Patrol Detach-

ment in El Paso, Texas, all three aircraft were lostin crashes during 1939.

Lockheed JO—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JO-2)

Type: Seven- to eight- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Burbank,

California.Total produced: 7 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Two 400-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-48

Wasp Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial enginesdriving two- bladed, variable- pitch metal pro-pellers.


Weights: 5,765 lbs. empty, 8,650 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 49 ft. 6 in., length 36 ft. 4 in., wing

area 352 sq. ft.

Appearing in mid–1936 as a scaled- downversion of the Model 10, the Lockheed Model 12“Electra Junior” was intended to operate withsmaller commercial airline carriers on feederroutes. Designated JO-1, a five- place Model 12-A purchased by BuAer was delivered in August1937 for use by the Naval Attaché in Rio deJaneiro, Brazil. And from late 1937, BuAer pro-cured five more 12-As, configured for six seatsas the JO-2, two of which were assigned to theNAS Anacostia as staff transports and three tothe Marines, one to VMJ-1 (later VMJ-152) atQuantico, one to VMJ-2 (later VMJ-252) at SanDiego, and the last to Headquarters, USMC. Thesingle XJO-3, delivered to Anacostia in Octo-ber 1938, was an experimental variant havinga fixed tricycle landing gear and an arrestorhook for deck trials conducted aboard Lexingtonto test the new gear arrangement. After complet-ing these tests, the XJO-3 was moved to the


Two of the three Waco EQC-6 cabin biplanes pro-cured by the Coast Guard in 1938 as the J2W-1.After being assigned to various duties, all threewere destroyed in crashes during 1939.

Waco J2W-1

Boston airport in Massachusetts to serve as an airborne radartesbed.

In August 1941 a civilian 12-A was impressed into navalservice as the R3O-2 (the use of this designation rather thanJO is an anomaly) and thereafter shipped to London, Englandfor the use of the Naval Attaché there. At the time of the Japa-nese attack on Pear Harbor on December 7, 1941, the JO-1 andfour of the JO-2s were still serving at their original locations,VMJ-252’s JO-2 was destroyed on the ground at MCAS Ewa,Hawaii the day of the attack, and the XJO-3 had beentransferred to NAS Norfolk.

Stearman- Hammond JH—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JH-1)

Type: Two- place landplane flying testbed.Manufacturer: Stearman- Hammond Co., Oakland, California.Total produced: 2 (USN)Powerplant: one 150-hp Menasco L-363-C-4S 4-cylinder air- cooled

inline engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Performance: max. speed 130 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range

480 mi.


The Navy acquired six Lockheed 12-As in 1937 and 1938, one asthe JO-1 (five-seats) and five as the JO-2 (six-seats). This photo-graph depicts the first of three JO-2s assigned to the Marinesduring 1938.

Lockheed JO-2

Stearman HammondJH-1

The Navy purchased two Stearman-Hammond Y-1S “safe air-planes” in 1937 under the designation JH-1. Both were assignedto VJ-1 in San Diego as target drones and written off in late 1938.

Weights: 1,382 lbs. empty, 2,150 lbs. gross.Dimensions: Span 40 ft. 0 in., length 26 ft. 11 in., wing

area (not reported).

Designed by Dean B. Hammond in 1934 inresponse to the Bureau of Air Commerce “safeairplane” contest and built by Lloyd Stearman,the Stearman- Hammond Y-125 (Y-1M), flown in1936, followed by the improved Y-150 (Y-1S) in1937, represented an ultimately unsuccessful at-tempt to introduce a lightplane to the civil marketthat would be both easy to fly and relatively af-fordable. The design— all- metal, tricycle gear ina twin boom pusher configuration—won the com-petition, but an eventual price of $5,000 per air-craft (compared to $1,098 for a Piper J-3 Cub),turned it into a commercial failure. In 1937,BuAer purchased two Y-1Ss under the designationJH-1 and both were placed in service as targetdrones with VJ-1 in San Diego. Painted yellow astrainers in order to hide their identity, they werethe first radio- controlled aircraft to be tested bythe Navy. Although both JH-1s were listed as hav-ing “crashed” in late 1938, they are thought tohave been shot down during antiaircraft gunnerytests.

North American NJ—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NJ-1)

Type: Two- place landplane basic trainer.Manufacturer: North American Aviation, Inc., Ingle-

wood, California.Total produced: 40 (USN)Powerplant: One 500-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-6

Wasp 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine drivinga two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.


Weights: 3,250 lbs. empty, 4,440 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 42 ft., length 27 ft. 2 in.,


The origins of the NJ can be traced to1934 when the U.S. Army invited aircraftmanufacturers to submit flying prototypesfor a basic trainer that would incorporaterecent advances seen in the aeronautical state- of- the- art. North American, a rela-tively new company, tested its NA-16 pro-totype for the first time on April 1, 1935,then following a series of improvementsoffered it to the Army as the NA-18. Pow-ered by a 400-hp Wright R-975-7 engine,the NA-18 emerged as a clean monoplanedesign that was all- metal in structure with aluminum- skinned wings, a fabric- coveredfuselage, and fixed landing gear encased


The naval variant of Air Corps BT-9, the 40 NJ-1s featured R-1340 engines and alu-minum-clad fuselages. The aircraft pictured had been assigned to command duties in1938.

North American NJ-1

in fairings. In 1936, after winning the competition, NorthAmerican received a contract for 42 production aircraftas the BT-9, then later that year, BuAer ordered 40 navalvariants, nearly identical to BT-9s except for 500-hpPratt & Whitney R-1340 engines, which were taken intoservice during 1937 under the designation NJ-1. The for-tieth NJ airframe was completed with an experimentalRanger V-770-4 inverted V-12 engine and briefly testedas the NJ-2 but afterward refitted with an R-1340 andplaced in regular service as an NJ-1. All NJ-1s were as-signed to NAS Pensacola for training duties, and 39 stillserved there in December 1941.

Beechcraft JB and GB—1937

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (GB-1)

Type: Four- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Beech Aircraft Co., Wichita, Kansas.Total produced: 293 (USN, USMC)Power plant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-50 Wasp

Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 212 mph; ceiling 25,000 ft.; range670 mi.

Weights: 2,540 lbs. empty, 4,250 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: span 32 ft., length 26 ft. 10 in., wing area 297

sq. ft.

The legendary Beech Model 17 “Staggerwing”made its debut as a fixed- gear civil aircraft in late 1932,and the retractable- gear B17L of 1934 became the firstproduction model. Of mixed construction, with awelded, steel tube fuselage and built- up wooden wings,all Model 17s were distinguishable by the obvious backstagger of their upper wing and a fuselage thatgracefully faired into a rounded fin and rudder. In late1937, under the designation JB-1, BuAer purchased an off- the- shelf C17R, powered by a 420-hp Wright R-975-E2 engine, which was subsequently employed as a com-mand aircraft from 1937 to 1939.

The next order came in1939, when the Navy acquired10 Wasp Junior–powered D17Smodels as the GB-1. The GB-1s served primarily as utilitytransports attached to variousair stations and also with theNaval Attachés in Madrid,Spain and Mexico City, Mex-ico. During 1941, as part of thewar buildup, the first of some271 GB-2s ordered (historicalsources do not agree on theexact number procured byBuAer from 1941 to 1945),identical to -1s with the excep-tion of R-985-AN1 engines,


A Navy GB-2 just before World War II, essentially the same as the civil model D17S. Typically theywere assigned to various air stations as utility transports.

Beech GB-1

began entering service as utility trans-ports at both regular and reserve airstations. Twenty- seven GB-1s and -2swere listed as active in December 1941,and a number of civil D17s were re-portedly impressed into naval serviceafter the war began.

Grumman JRF (J3F)Goose—1939

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS(JRF-5)

Type: Eight- to nine- place utility- transportamphibian.

Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr.Corp., Bethpage, New York

Total produced: 214 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplants: Two 450-hp Pratt & Whitney

R-985-AN-12 Wasp Junior 9-cylinder

air-cooled radial engines driving two- bladed, variable- pitchmetal propellers.

Armament (JRF-4, and -5): 250 lbs. of bombs or depth charges.Performance: Max. speed 201 mph; ceiling 21,300 ft.; range 800

mi.Weights: 5,245 lbs. empty, 8,000 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 49 ft., length 38 ft. 6 in., wing area 375 sq. ft.

The well- known Goose amphibian was originally builtas a fast executive transport for wealthy businessmen com-muting in and out of New York City and is also acknowl-edged as the very first monoplane to have been designedat Grumman. Known internally as the Model G-21, the de-sign team of William Schwendler as project engineer andRalston Stalb as hydrodynamicist evolved an exceptionallyclean, deep- bodied hull, which joined to a fully canti -levered wing incorporating split- type flaps designed to holdtakeoff and landing speeds within acceptable limits. Powercame from two tightly cowled Wasp Junior enginesmounted in streamlined nacelles on the wings Other than fabric- covered control surfaces, the entire airframe con-sisted of light- alloy aluminum construction. After makingits first flight on May 29, 1937, early testing showed the G-21 to possess superb handling qualities along with levelsof flight performance that exceeded most twin- engine land-plane designs. Refinements to the hull, upgraded SB2 en-gines, and a 500-lb. increase in takeoff weight resulted inthe introduction of the G-21A in 1938 as the standard civilproduction model.

In late 1938, BuAer acquired one G-21A for evaluationunder the designation XJ3F-1, and in early 1939, followingbrief trials, gave Grumman a contract to produce ten moreas the JRF-1. Shortly after entering Navy service, one JRF-1 was transferred to the Marine Corps as a commandaircraft and five others, including the original XJ3F-1, afterreceiving modifications for target- towing and photographic


One of seven JRF-2s delivered to the Coast Guard in 1940 and 1941. Coast Guard variantswere specially equipped for search and rescue.

Grumman JRF-1

work, were returned to service as the JRF-1A. In 1940and 1941, 10 JRFs were procured for the Coast Guard,seven as JRF-2s with seats interchangeable withstretchers and three as JRF-3s with autopilots and de- icing equipment, plus 10 for the Navy as JRF-4sequipped with racks that could carry 250 lbs. of ord-nance under each wing, either bombs or depthcharges. As the United States stepped- up its prepara-tions for war, Grumman received a large- scalecontract in 1940 to produce 185 JRF-5s, 16 of whichhad been delivered by the end of 1941. As the principalproduction variant, the JRF-5 featured small detailrefinements, uprated AN-12 engines, as well as cameraequipment. Though most JRFs variants were attachedto shore stations for general utility and transportationduties, a number flew armed coastal patrols duringthe first year of the war.

North American SNJ—1939TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SNJ-3)

Type: Two- place landplane advanced trainer.Manufacturer: North American Aviation, Inc., Inglewood,

California and Dallas, Texas.Total produced: 4,876 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 600-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN1 Wasp

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Armament (SNJ-3/-4): one fixed .30-cal. machine gun incowling (plus one fixed .30-cal. machine gun in wingon SNJ-5), provision for one flexible .30-caliber ma-chine gun in the rear cockpit, and up to ten 20-lb. orfour 100-lb. bombs carried on wing racks.



North American’s venerable SNJ, in conjunctionwith its Army AT-6 counterpart, is universally recog-nized as having been the most important American- made advanced trainer of thewartime period. Since the fixed- gearBT-9/ NJ had been designed from theoutset with significant development po-tential, it is no surprise that NorthAmerican’s Model NA-26, a retractable- gear variant with an uprated R-1340 en-gine, won the Army’s “Basic Combat”trainer competition of 1937, culminatingin a contract for 177 aircraft as the BC-1 (production Model NA-36). In 1938,continuing refinements to the basic de-sign such as an all- metal, semi- mono -cocque fuselage and revised wing tipsled to a Navy order for 16 aircraft (pro-duction Model NA-52) under the des-ignation SNJ-1, the first naval aircraft to


SNJ-1 BuNo 1552, the first of thousands of Navy SNJs, as delivered in 1939. All 16 SNJ-1swent to NAS Pensacola as advanced trainers, and most of the 61 SNJ-2s in 1940 to thereserves as instrument trainers.

North American SNJ-2


use the scout- trainer (SN) designation. In viewof the training needed by the Navy’s growingpool of reserve pilots, BuAer had originallyearmarked all the SNJ-1s for reserve bases butas deliveries began during mid–1939, theywere assigned elsewhere, eventually ending upat NAS Pensacola.

The next Navy order came in 1939 for 61SNJ-2s, which differed in having 550-hp R-1340-56 direct drive engines, the initial batchbeing delivered in early 1940 to 13 different re-serve bases, primarily for instrument training,and as deliveries continued, 19 were assignedto NAS Pensacola, 15 to Anacostia, and a num-ber of others to flag officers as command air-craft. In 1940, due to increasing U.S. warpreparations and the antici pated need for thou-sands of training aircraft, the Navy and theArmy agreed upon a standardized SNJ-3/AT-6A version (production Models NA-77, 78,and 85) that would be manufactured at a newNorth American plant being built in Dallas,Texas, as well as the company’s existing facil-ities in California. Thus, in 1941, the Navybegan receiving the first of 420 SNJ-3s or-dered, 295 of which were on hand by the endof the year. A majority of these (248) were as-signed to flight training centers at CorpusChristi, Jacksonville, Pensacola, and Miami.SNJ-3s/AT-6As were the first of the series tobe powered with 600-hp AN1 engines and havethe distinctive triangular fin and rudder shape.

During the course of the war, the Navyaccepted delivery of a further 125 SNJ-3s,2,400 SNJ-4s, 1,568 SNJ-5s and 411 SNJ-6s.SNJs retrofitted with arresting gear for carrierqualification training carried a “C” suffix (i.e.,SNJ-3C, -4C, and -5C). After the war, upthrough the late 1950s, large numbers of Navy and Marine SNJswere retained in both the flight- training role and as proficiencyand instruments trainers in individuals units, and the very lastexample was not stricken from the naval inventory until 1968.

Douglas R3D—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R3D-1)

Type: Eighteen- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., El Segundo, California.Total produced: 7 (USN, USMC)Powerplants: Two 1,000-hp Wright R-1820-44 Cyclone 9-cylinder air-

cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, constant- speed metalpropellers.



In mid–1938, while its DB-7 twin- engine, light bomberprototype (Army designation A-20; see Douglas BD, above)was at an advanced stage of construction, the Douglas plant atEl Segundo embarked upon the design of the DC-5, a 16-pas-senger short- haul airliner having a high- wing, tricycle gear lay-out similar to that of the bomber. The company expected thatthe plane would be capable of operating out of shorter airfieldsover shorter routes at the same economy of its DC-3. The designof the DC-5 emerged 25 percent larger than the DB-7, featuringa completely new circular- section fuselage, and wing area wasincreased chordwise and spanwise in order to create a loadfactor comparable to that of the DC-3 (i.e., 25.5 lbs. per squarefoot). In order to operate from shorter airfields, the wings in-corporated fully articulated trailing edge flaps running fromthe wing root to the ailerons. The underwing position of thecircular side windows provided passengers with unsurpassedvisibility, and the stance of the tricycle gear gave them easy ac-cess through a side door and a level center aisle to walk on. Al-

Douglas R3D-2

though potential airline customers had the option of spec-ifying powerplants, the prototype was equipped with a pairof 900-hp Wright GR-1820-F62 Cyclones.

By the time the aircraft was ready to fly, Douglas hadreceived advance orders for 21 civil variants and seven forthe Navy. BuAer planned to allocate three to Naval AirStations as staff transports under the designation R3D-1and four under a revised specification to the Marines as theR3D-2. The DC-5 prototype made its first flight on Febru-ary 20, 1939, but the test program ran into immediatedifficulties due to a serious tail- buffeting problem encoun-tered during certain phases of flight. While the El Segundoengineering staff worked to solve the problem, all but fourof the airline pre- orders were cancelled. The buffeting wastraced to turbulence created by engine thrust above the hor-izontal stabilizers and elevators and eventually correctedby adding fifteen degrees of dihedral to the horizontaltailplane. A dorsal fillet was also added the vertical fin toimprove directional stability.

The first R3D-1, completed during the spring of 1940,crashed in June while being tested at the factory. The nexttwo R3D-1s were delivered without incident in July 1940,and both assigned to NAS Anacostia. Between Septemberand November the same year, the four R3D-2s enteredservice with the Marines, two with VMJ-2 (later VMJ-252)at MCAS Ewa, Hawaii, and two with VMJ-1 (later VMJ-152) at MCAS Quantico, Virginia. The R3D-2s differedfrom the -1s in having cargo doors on the port side, moreseats (22), a reinforced cabin floor, and less fuel capacityin order to increase other payloads. Although the type’saerodynamics problems had been fully resolved, pro duc -tion was ultimately limited to the twelve aircraft completedby the end of 1940 due to new wartime contracts imposedon El Segundo’s facilities (i.e., production of SBDs andA-20s). By the end of 1941, both R3D-1s had been trans-ferred to new duty stations, one to NAS San Diego and the

other to NAS New York; the four R3D-2s, which had been used to conduct para-trooper and other combat- related ma -neuvers, remained in their originalassignments. The DC-5 prototype, afterbeing purchased by William E. Boeingas a personal transport, was comman-deered by the Navy in February 1942 andplaced in service as the R3D-3. Thissame aircraft was later used to conductearly experi ments with the ground con-trolled approach (GCA) instrument land-ing system.

Spartan NP—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NP-1)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Mid- Continent Div. of Spartan

Aircraft Co., Tulsa, Oklahoma.


The only Douglas DC-5s built to a military specification, two R3D-2s were delivered tothe Marines in 1940 for planned paratrooper training. The Navy also used three civilversions as the R3D-1 and -3.

Spartan NP-1

Total produced: 201 (USN)Powerplant: One 220-hp Lycoming R-680-8 7-cylinder air- cooled

radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch metal propeller.



area 301 sq. ft.

The first military aircraft to be produced bySpartan, the Navy accepted delivery of an experi-mental prototype in 1940 under the designationXNP-1. It emerged as fairly conventional biplane de-sign having an all- aluminum structure with fabriccovering on the wings, tailplane, and aft fuselage.The sturdy appearing landing gear was braced by abelly pylon and side oleos. Following official trials,BuAer awarded Spartan an order for 200 more air-craft as the NP-1, with deliveries starting in 1941, 76of which were on hand by the end of the year. AllNP-1s were used to equip the new Naval ReservePrimary Flying Schools in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas,Detroit, Kansas City, New Orleans, and St. Louis,continuing in this role throughout World War II.

Lockheed R5O—1940

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R5O-1)

Type: Eighteen- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Bur bank, Cali-

fornia.Total produced: 67 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplants: Two 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-97 Cyclone 9-

cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, constant- speed metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 246 mph at 7,900 ft.; ceiling25,400 ft.; range 1,700 mi.


area 551 sq. ft.

Lockheed introduced the Model 18 “Lodestar” in 1939 outof an effort to improve the high seat- mile cost that airlines hadexperienced with the Model 14 (see Lockheed PBO/R5O,above). Using the general aerodynamic design of the Model14, the Model 18 appeared with a new fuselage, lengthened fiveand a half feet, while retaining the same wing planform. As thefirst production examples began reaching airlines, the CoastGuard procured one Model 18 in May 1940 under thedesignation XR5O-1, and upon delivery, the aircraft was basedat Floyd Bennett Field in New York. A BuAer order later thesame year resulted in the delivery of two Model 18s to the Navyas the R5O-1, one assigned one to the Secretary of the Navyand the other to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, bothbased at Anacostia. The single R5O-2, a Model 18-07 poweredby Pratt & Whitney R-1690-25 Hornet engines, entered serviceat NAS Pensacola in 1940, where it was used as a VIP transport.Two R5O-3s with plush executive interiors and 1,200-hp Pratt& Whitney R-1830-34A powerplants were added to the navalinventory during 1941. Both served as VIP transports at Ana-


One of 75 Spartan NP-1s delivered by the end of 1941. All of theseaircraft were earmarked for the new Naval Reserve Primary Fly-ing Schools in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Kansas City,New Orleans, and St. Louis.

Lockheed R50-3

costia, one being assigned to the Commandant of theMarine Corps.

All six R5Os remained in their initial dutystations as of December 1941. Over the course ofWorld War II, the Navy procured another 61 Cyclone-powered Model 18s: 26 impressed from the variousairlines, which included 12 as the R5O-4 (7–12 seats)and 14 as the R5O-5 (14 seats), plus 35 C-60As orig-inally ordered by the USAAF that were placed in serv-ice as the R5O-6. The R5O-4s and -5s wereconfigured as staff transports, six being assigned tothe Coast Guard and two to the Marines. The R5O-6s, configured as 18-seat troop carriers, served withvarious Navy transport and ferry units (VR and VRF),and at least six were assigned to the Marines.

Beechcraft JRB—1940

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (JRB-2)

Type: Seven- place landplane utility transport, drone con-troller.

Manufacturer: Beech Aircraft Co., Wichita, Kansas.Total produced: 374 (USN, USMC, USCG, not including

later SNB variants)Powerplant: Two 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-50 Wasp

Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 225 mph; ceiling 26,000 ft.; range1,200 mi.

Weights: 5,501 lbs. empty, 7,850 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span, 47 ft. 8 in., length 34 ft. 8 in., wing area

349 sq. ft.

Known over its long history as the “Twin Beech,”the maiden flight of the legendary Model 18 took placeon January 15, 1937. Powered at first with 350-hpWright R-760 engines (Model 18A), it emerged as avery clean monoplane constructed of aluminum alloy,with metal- framed, fabric- covered control surfaces,


The Navy received 15 JRB-2s in 1941, which were identical to theArmy C-45A. The aircraft depicted was assigned as a flag planefor Commander Air Scouting Forces.

Beech JRB-1

Two Lockheed Model 18 Lodestars were added to the navalinventory in 1940 as the R5O-1. The aircraft depicted served atNAS Anacostia for the use of the secretary of the Navy and hisstaff.

retractable landing gear, and a distinctive twin- finempennage. Beech initially marketed the type as ei-ther a small airliner or business transport which couldbe ordered in five different powerplant options. Saleswere relatively modest, however, until theintroduction of the Wasp Junior–powered Model 18Sin 1939, when Beech began receiving the first militaryorders, starting with an Army contract for 25 18Ss,14 of which were to be specially configured for photo- reconnaissance work as the F-2 and the rest as C-45staff transports.

In June 1940, under naval designation JRB-1,BuAer awarded Beech a contract to produce five air-craft very similar to the Army’s F-2, but having anelevated cockpit to accommodate a drone controllerdirectly behind the flight deck as well as the provisionfor camera installation. Six more were subsequentlyadded to the order, and all 11 JRB-1s had been ac-cepted by the end of the year. Four were assigned toVJ-3 in Anacostia, five to VJ-5 in San Diego, andtwo to NAF in Philadelphia. Late in 1940, Beech wasgiven a second Navy contract for 15 JRB-2 transportversions (identical to the Army C-45A), with deliv-eries commencing in 1941. The JRB-2s, all placed inservice by the end of the year, received a variety ofassignments to various bases and commands, includ-ing three examples transferred to the Marines. Oncethe U.S. entered World War II, all Model 18 navalvariants (JRBs and SNBs) were procured fromUSAAF production orders. By the end of 1945, theNavy, Marine and Coast Guard had taken delivery afurther 243 JRB-3s (C-45B), 328 JRB-4s (UC-45F),320 SNB-1s (AT-11 bombardier trainers), and 509SNB-2s (AT-7 navigator trainers). As a result of postwar modification and upgrade programs,many JRBs and SNBs were returned to dutyas SNB-4s and -5s, and some served wellinto the 1960s.

Naval Aircraft FactoryN5N—1941

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (XN5N-1)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadel-

phia, Pennsylvania.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplant: One 240-hp Wright R-760-6

7-cylinder air- cooled radial engine drivinga two- bladed, fixed- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 135 mph at s.1.; ceiling13,900 ft.; range (not reported).

Weights: Empty (not reported), 3,370 lbs. gross.Dimensions: span 42 ft., length 30 ft. 5 in., wing

area 215 sq. ft. (est.).


The sole XN5N-1 seen during World War II with addition of an enclosed cockpit. Abacklog of other NAF projects prevented it from reaching production.

NAF XN5N-1

In 1938 BuAer authorized NAF to design andbuild one XN5N-1 prototype with the aim of evalu-ating a monoplane for potential use as a primarytrainer. As work progressed, the design appearedwith an all- metal, aluminum- clad airframe and broad- chord, fully cantilevered wings having suffi-cient area to produce a load factor similar to that ofbiplane trainers. Other features included split- typeflaps and a full engine cowling. The intervention ofother NAF projects, however, delayed the first flightof the XN5N-1 until the spring of 1941, by whichtime the Navy had placed the N3N-3 into high- rateproduction and contracted for large numbers ofStearman N2Ss to fulfill its long- term primarytrainer needs. Even so, testing of the XN5N-1 atNAF continued after 1941, where it was used as aglider tug, and later still, fitted with a fully enclosedcockpit.

Ryan NR-1—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (NR-1)

Type: Two- place landplane trainer.Manufacturer: Ryan Aeronautical Co., San Diego, Cali-

fornia.Total produced: 100 (USN)Powerplant: One 160-hp Kinner R-5 (R-540-1) 5-cylinder

air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, fixed- pitch wooden propeller.



134 sq. ft.

Better known as the Army PT-22 “Recruit,”BuAer ordered 100 Ryan Model STK-3Rs that wereaccepted into service during 1941 as the NR-1. TheSTK-3R, featuring an all- metalairframe with fabric covering onthe wings, tail group, and aft fuse-lage, had been conceived as a mil-itary development of Ryan’sMenasco B-4 inline- powered STsport plane design of 1934. In ad-dition to the Kinner radial power-plant, the ST-3KR introduced alengthened fuselage, reshaped finand rudder, wide- track, knee- action maiin landing gear, plusslight sweepback added to thewings. All NR-1s were assigned toNAS Jacksonville, Florida for pri-mary flight training. The Navy ac-quired no more after 1941.


In 1941 the Navy procured 100 NR-1s, identical to the Army PT-22. They were all assigned tothe newly established base at NAS Jacksonville for primary flight training.

Ryan NR-1

Grumman J4F Widgeon—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (J4F-1)

Type: Five- place utility and patrol amphibian.Manufacturer: Grumman Aircraft Engr. Corp.,

Bethpage, New York.Total produced: 141 (USN, USCG)Powerplants: Two 200-hp Ranger L-440-5 6-cylin-

der air- cooled inline engines driving two- bladed, fixed- pitch wooden propellers.

Armament (J4F-1): One 200-lb. depth charge underright wing.


Weights: 3,240 lbs. empty, 4,525 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 40 ft., length 31 ft. 1 in., wing

area 245 sq. ft.

Originally conceived in 1940 for thecivilian market, Grumman’s Ranger- poweredModel G-44 found itself conscripted into mil-itary service by the time it reached pro duc -tion. While utilizing the proven two- step hullconfiguration, hand- operated landing gear,and all- metal construction of the Model G-21, the smaller G-44 materialized with the squared- off wings and tail surfaces that typ-ified newer Grumman designs (e.g., F4F-3,TBF-1). An all- new wing planform, present -ing a constant- chord center- section on whichthe inline engines were mounted high up outof the spray, featured a sharply taperedtrailing edge from mid- chord to the tip andfully articulated trailing- edge flaps. The firstflight of the G-44 prototype took place onJune 28, 1940 from Grumman’s plant at Beth-page, and as flight trials proceeded, the onlyaerodynamic change consisted of addingmass balance horns to the elevators.

The first twenty- five production G-44s,


After the government commandeered G-44 production, the first 25 went to the Coast Guard in 1941 as the J4F-1. They flew armedpatrols along the U.S. coast in early World War II.

Grumman J4F-1

assigned the naval designation J4F-1, were allocated to theCoast Guard, with deliveries commencing in mid–1941, and thenext batch of twenty- six, including ten originally destined forPortugal and sixteen ordered by civilians, wereimpressed into USAAF service in early 1942 asthe OA-14. From 1942 to 1945, Grumman com-pleted another 131 aircraft under Navy contractsas the J4F-2, fifteen of which were subsequently Lend- Leased to Great Britain as the Gosling I(later Widgeon I, which developed into the type’sofficial name), plus several more to the Por-tuguese Naval Air Service and the Brazilian AirForce. Coast Guard J4F-1s, after being retrofittedto carry a 200-lb. depth charge beneath the rightwing between the fuselage and the engine na-celle, began flying antisubmarine missions offthe American coast. On August 1, 1942, whileoperating out of the USCG base at Houma,Louisiana, a J4F-1 flown by Chief Aviation PilotHenry White was credited with the sinking ofU-166. (Ironically, following discovery of thewreck by an oil exploration team in 2001, it wasdetermined that the submarine had not been sunkby an aircraft but by PC-556, a Navy coastal pa-trol ship.) In Navy service, J4F-2s were mostoften employed as land- based utility transports,though some were also used as instrument train-ers.

Douglas R4D—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (R4D-2)

Type: Twenty- seven- place landplane transport.Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Co., Santa Monica

and Long Beach, California.Total produced: 579 (USN, USMC, USCG, not in-

cluding postwar R4D-8).Powerplants: Two 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-71 Cyclone

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed, constant- speed metal propellers.

Performance: Max. speed 237 mph; ceiling 24,000 ft.;range 1,025 mi.


area 987 sq. ft.

The Douglas DC-3, almost certainly themost famous transport aircraft of all time, hadbeen in regular airline service for over four yearsat the time BuAer ordered the first 30 Navy ex-amples in September 1940 under the designationR4D-1. Unlike airline versions, the military vari-ant (i.e., the R4D-1 and the Army C-47A werebeing built to identical specifications), was to bepowered by 1,200-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-92 Twin Wasp engines and come with dual cargodoors and a reinforced floor. In 1941, 71 moreR4D-1s were added to the contract, however, ini-

tial deliveries of these aircraft did not commence until early1942, after the U.S. had entered World War II.

In actual fact, the first two DC-3s placed on naval


The Navy impressed two DC-3s from an Eastern Airlines order in 1941 as R4D-2s. The aircraft pictured was assigned to NAS Anacostia as a VIP transport. Firstproduction R4D-1s did not arrive until early 1942.

Douglas R4D-2

inventory were requisitioned from an Eastern Air-lines order in early 1941 and went into to serviceas the R4D-2. These two aircraft, delivered respec-tively in March and April 1941, were Cyclone- powered variants having standard airline seatingand a right- side entry door. Both were assigned asVIP transports, one to NAS Anacostia and theother to NAS Pensacola. From 1942 onwards, R4Dsbecame the most numerous Navy, Marine, andCoast Guard transport aircraft of the wartime era,which, after delivery of the R4D-1s and -2s, in-cluded 20 R4D-3s, 10 R4D-4s, 238 R4D-5s, 157R4D-6s, and 43 R4D-7s.

Curtiss SNC—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SNC-1)

Type: Two- place landplane advanced trainer.Manufacturer: Curtiss Airplane Div., Curtiss- Wright

Corp., St. Louis, Missouri.Total produced: 305 (USN, USMC)Powerplant: One 420-hp Wright R-975-E3 Whirlwind

9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.



174 sq. ft.

In November 1940, to augment the SNJ-3s onorder, BuAer awarded Curtiss a contract to build150 advanced trainers under the designation SNC-1. The Curtiss Model CW-22, advertised as both alight attack aircraft and a trainer, had originallybeen developed from the CW-21 of 1938, a Cyclone- powered, single- place fighter offered tothe export market. Sharing the same general di-mensions and aerodynamic features ofthe fighter, the all- metal CW-22 wascharacterized by a clean, semi- monocoque fuselage structure, wingssharply taped from the leading edges,and a rearward- folding, semi- exposedlanding gear arrangement. Deliveriesof production aircraft to the Navy com-menced during 1941 and at some point,apparently the same year, the order wasincreased to 305 aircraft. By Decemberthe Navy had accepted a total of 148SNC-1s, 147 of which were serving intraining duties at NAS Jacksonville(19) and NAS Corpus Christi (128) andone at NAF for evaluation. Severalwere assigned to the Marines for liaisonduties during the course of the war.


Rapid growth of training in 1940 led the Navy to contract for 150 SNC-1s to augment theSNJ-3s already on order. Most were assigned to NAS Corpus Christi in the advanced phaseof pilot training. Another 155 were added in 1941.

Curtiss SNC-1

Vultee SNV—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SNV-1)

Type: Two- place landplane basic trainer.Manufacturer: Vultee Aircraft, Inc. (later Consolidated-

Vultee Corp.), Nashville, Tennessee.Total produced: 2,000 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-AN1 Wasp

Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 182 mph at 1,400 ft.; ceiling 21,000ft.; range 725 mi.


sq. ft.

Similar in concept to the CW-22/SNC discussedabove, the SNV had been conceived by designerRichard Palmer as a common airframe which could beadapted to either fighter (Model 48) or trainer (Model54) variations. Vultee’s efforts during early 1939 to sellthe Army an R-1340-powered, retractable- gear, ad-vanced trainer version (evaluated as the BC-3) werenot successful, but introduction of the Model 54A laterthe same year, a fixed- gear basic trainer variant withan R-985 engine, resulted in an initial Army produc -tion order for 300 aircraft as the BT-13. Slightly lighterthan the preceding BT-9/NJ-1, the BT-13 offered a mod-ern, aluminum- clad airframe that could potentially be mass- produced in large quantities for America’s grow-ing military training needs. In August 1940, as U.S.war preparations burgeoned, Vultee received contractsfor 3,350 improved Model 74s, which combined anArmy order for 2,000 BT-13As with a Navy order foranother 1,350 under the designation SNV-1. The Model74 differed from the Model 54A (BT-13) in having aR-985-AN1 powerplant and small detail changes.

The first production SNV-1 arrived at NAS CorpusChristi in August 1941, and 170 more had beenplaced on the Naval inventory before the yearended, 35 serving at Corpus Christi, 25 atPensacola, and one at Anacostia, plus afurther 100 awaiting assignment. As deliveriescontinued, SNV-1s were placed in service withmajor training bases at Miami, Jacksonville,Corpus Christi, and Pensacola. During WorldWar II, the Navy also accepted 650 SNV-2swith AN3 engines and 24-volt electrical sys-tems. During the war, two SNV-1s were as-signed to the Coast Guard and small numberalso served with various Marine squadrons.BuAer declared the type obsolete in mid–1945, and the last SNV-2 was stricken fromthe inventory in April 1946.


One of the earliest SNV-1s at Corpus Christi in mid–1941. Note the Army BT-14 plusNavy SNJ-3 and JRB-1 in the background. The Navy would accept 170 by the endof the year; another 1,830 were delivered from 1942 onwards.

Vultee SNV-2

Howard GH—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (GH-1)

Type: Four- to five- place landplane utility transport.Manufacturer: Howard Aircraft, Corp., Chicago, Illinois.Total produced: 485 (USN, USMC, USCG)Powerplant: One 450-hp Pratt & Whitney R-985-AN1 Wasp

Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engine driving a two- bladed, variable- pitch metal propeller.

Performance: Max. speed 201 mph at s.1.; ceiling 21,000 ft.;range 1,260 mi.


sq. ft.

In 1941 BuAer initially contracted for 34 Howardcivil Model DGA-15s (i.e., DGA = damned good air-plane) to be used as single- engine utility transportsunder the designation GH-1, with six examples reachingservice by year- end. The type’s general design had beeninspired by Howard’s Bendix and Thompson Trophywinning DGA-6 Mr. Mulligan racer of 1935. Wartimeorders accounted for 451 more of the type, 131 as GH-2 utility transports, 115 as GH-3 aerial ambulances, and205 as NH-1 instrument trainers, a number of whichwere subsequently assigned duties with the Marinesand Coast Guard.

Schweizer LNS—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (LNS-1)

Type: Two- place training glider.Manufacturer: Schweizer Aircraft Corp., Elmira, New York.Total produced: 13 (USMC)Powerplant: (None.)Performance: Max. speed 72 mph.; glide ratio 18:1 at 42 mph.Weights: 450 lbs. empty, 860 lbs. loaded.Dimensions: Span 52 ft., length 25 ft. 9 in., wing area 214

sq. ft.

Whether or not these glid-ers were actually placed on thenaval inventory prior to 1942 isnot entirely certain, but theywill be reported here in casethey were. In early 1941, as partof the U.S. war buildup, theArmy and Navy Departmentsboth initiated glider programsto train pilots for future opera-tions using assault- type gliders


One of six Howard GH-1s placedon the naval inventory by theend of 1941. In addition to 16GH-1s, wartime orders ac -counted for 131 GH-2 utilitytransports, 115 GH-3 air ambu-lances, and 205 NH-1 instrumenttrainers.

Howard GH-1

to support paratroopers. The two- seatSchweizer SGS 2-8, intended both fortraining and sport, first appeared on thecivil market in 1938 and was characterizedby an all- metal, fabric- covered structure,high aspectratio wings mounted at mid- fuselage, and a tandem seating arrange-ment under a long, greenhouse canopy.After the Army had ordered the type intoproduction as the TG-2, BuAer contractedfor 13 examples under the designationLNS-1. The first six, assigned to theMarine Glider Group at Page Field, ParrisIsland, South Carolina, are thought to havearrived in late 1941. After experimentingwith different types of gliders, includinglarger assault types, the Navy terminatedthe glider program in 1943.


Thirteen of these Schweitzer LNS-1s (same as Army TG-2) were used at Page Field Parris Island to train Marine pilots to fly glidersin projected airborne operations.

Schweizer LNS-1

LTA Program Overview

The Navy’s lighter- than- air (LTA) program can be said tohave gone full circle during the interwar period, coming out ofWorld War I with a modest fleet of small non- rigid patrol air-ships (i.e., blimps), then from the early 1920s, focusing practi-cally all emphasis upon construction and operation of hugerigid airships (i.e., dirigibles), and finally, when the rigid pro-gram terminated with loss of Macon in 1935, redirecting all ef-forts back to the development of blimps. In any event, allthrough the 1919–1941 era, LTA represented only a small seg -ment of Naval Aviation as a whole, having no more than twolarge dirigibles in operation at any given time, and even by theend of 1941, numbered a force of just ten blimps.

RIGID AIRSHIPS (DIRIGIBLES)Synopsis of Rigid Airship Procurement

Originally, some months after World War I ended, theNavy had planned to obtain several German Zeppelins as warreparations, but in June 1919, before any transfer could takeplace, the Zeppelins were destroyed in their berths by their Ger-man aircrews. Despite this unforeseen turn of events, Navy offi-cials still planned to evaluate the possibility of employing rigidairships within the fleet as long- range scouts, so in August 1919,authorized the Naval Aircraft Factory (NAF) to proceed withconstruction of ZR-1 (lighter- than- air- rigid- one). Then just threemonths later, with ZR-1 in the early stages of design, the NavyDepartment agreed to purchase the partially completed airshipR38 from the British Government, which would give the Navya fully operational rigid airship two years before ZR-1’s pro-jected completion date. R38, now classified as ZR-2, began flight- testing in England during the summer of 1921, but on its pre- delivery shakedown run, the airship was completely con-sumed by fire in a crash subsequently attributed to structuralweakness. Taking in the harsh lessons learned from ZR-2,

design officials at NAF resolved that ZR-1 would use non- flammable helium as lifting gas rather than hydrogen. In yetanother move, while ZR-1 was still a year away from com ple -tion, the Navy concluded negotiations with the German Zep -pelin Co. in June 1923 to build a new rigid airship as ZR-3.

The program began in earnest in the fall of 1923, when,following brief flight trials, ZR-1 was commissioned USSShenandoah, and embarked on a series of proving flights thatincluded tactical exercises with the Scouting Fleet and ship- mooring experiments at sea with airship tender USS Patoka.A year later, in October 1924, ZR-3 arrived from Germany andwas subsequently placed in commission as the USS LosAngeles. Helium was in such short supply at the time it becamenecessary to transfer lifting gas from Shenandoah so that LosAngeles could begin training its crew. Although Los Angeleswas one of the world’s most advanced airships, internationalrestrictions imposed on the sale of armaments by Germanymandated that it would be used only in non- combat roles suchas training and transportation, and before it could be employedin any type of fleet exercise, the Navy would need to obtainclearance from the Allied Control Commission.

By June 1925, Shenandoah had been restored to operationsand resumed exercises in the Caribbean with the Scouting Fleetuntil September when it departed NAS Lakehurst on a Midwestpromotional tour. On September 25, while transiting over south-eastern Ohio, Shenandoah came apart in the mist of a violentthunderstorm; 43 of 57 crewmembers managed to survive thedisaster by navigating two detached segments of the airship tothe ground as free balloons. Undeterred by this setback, LTAadvocates within BuAer continued to press ahead, operatingLos Angeles on a series of proving flights that included a NorthAmerican cross- country tour and over- water treks to Bermudaand Puerto Rico; concurrently, naval design officials continuedwork on specifications for an even larger class of new airshiphaving more than twice the lifting capacity of Los Angeles.Over the next few years, Los Angeles logged some 1,400 hoursof flight- time that comprised aircrew training, fleet exercisesusing Patoka as a sea base, and several long- distance trips

PART II

Lighter-Than-Air Development

241

between the East Coast, Cuba, and Panama Canal Zone. ByMarch 1928, naval officials were sufficiently optimistic aboutthe future of dirigibles in the LTA program to award the Goodyear- Zeppelin consortium a contract to build ZRS-4 and-5, both rigid airships large enough to carry their own comple-ment of small aircraft. To augment the two blimps (L-3 and -4) in the LTA training program, the Navy also took delivery inmid–1929 of ZMC-2, a small airship that featured a rigid aluminum- clad structure.

In late 1929, fitted with a new “trapeze” arresting system,Los Angeles completed the first aircraft recovery experimentswith a “skyhook”-equipped Vought UO-1, while Goodyear- Zeppelin, at its new facility at Akron, Ohio, had officially begunwork on ZRS-4, with construction expected to proceed overthe next two years. On September 23, 1931, after beingchristened USS Akron, ZRS-4 commenced initial flight- testingand was officially commissioned at NAS Lakehurst a monthlater; within the same timeframe, Goodyear- Zeppelin startedconstruction of the nearly identical ZRS-5 in the newly vacatedairship dock at Akron. Los Angeles maintained a busy scheduleof flight operations training personnel for eventual transitionto ZRS-4 or -5 until June 1932, after which point it was decom-missioned and placed in storage as a static trainer. With the ar-rival of ZRS-5 forthcoming, the LTA program, as a practicalmatter, possessed neither the personnel nor the facilities to op-erate three large rigid airships at once. In fact, a new naval air-ship base was being built at Sunnyvale, California (near thesouth end of San Francisco Bay), with the plan that ZRS-4would be permanently based at NAS Lakehurst and ZRS-5 atSunnyvale.

Akron flew practice sorties with the Atlantic Scouting fleetduring early 1932, and the following spring, with its trapeze in-stalled, initiated aircraft launch and recovery exercises with aConsolidated N2Y-1 and the Curtiss XF9C-1, a fighter prototypedesigned especially for dirigible operations. After departing ona continental tour, the airship reached the new base at NASSunnyvale in June, where it participated with the Pacific Fleetfor several weeks, then returned to Lakehurst for the remainderof the year to resume trials with aircraft. The LTA program ap-peared to be gaining momentum on March 11, 1933, as thenearly complete ZRS-5 was christened Macon, but less than amonth later, on April 4, Akron was caught in a storm off theJew Jersey coast and plunged into the sea. In the world’s largestaviation disaster up to that time, 60 of 63 people aboard per-ished, including BuAer chief Rear Adm. William A. Moffett.

Commissioned just two months later, Macon proceeded withinitial crew training and aircraft hook- on experiments at NASLakehurst until mid–October, when it made a three-day transitto its permanent base at NAS Moffett Field (formerly Sunny-vale).

By early 1934, with a full complement of three fightersand one utility aircraft aboard (Curtiss F9C-2s and a WacoJW-1), Macon was fully operational for the first time. However,its performance in several fleet exercises conducted that springwas rated unsatisfactory overall: in most cases, naval officialsscored the airship as having been “destroyed” by carrier- basedaircraft before making any measurable contribution to thescouting problem. Macon was grounded for repairs in mid–1934 due to damage sustained in severe turbulence; but onceback in operation, the airship carried out numerous flights toimprove tactics and aircraft deployment methods in preparationfor the next year’s fleet problems. On February 11, 1935, whileen route to a fleet exercise off the California coast, a suddengust of turbulence ripped away Macon’s dorsal fin andpunctured three of its aft gas cells. All attempts to save the air-ship failed, and it settled into the ocean and sank; 81 of 83crewmembers were rescued. Soon afterward, the rigid airshipprogram ceased operations. Studies of larger rigid designs (i.e.,ZRCVs) never got off the drawing board. The program fullyand finally ended in late 1939 when Los Angeles was strickenfrom the naval inventory and dismantled.

ZR-2 (R.38)—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Long- range reconnaissance and bombardment rigid airship.Manufacturer: Shorts Brothers, Ltd., Cardington, England.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Six 350-hp Sunbeam Cossack III 12-cylinder water-

cooled inline engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden pro-pellers.

Armament (proposed): One one- pounder gun (top), 24 .30-cal.machine guns in paired positions, and up to 3,920 lbs. of bombscarried internally.

Performance: Max. speed 61 mph at s.1.; ceiling 22,000 ft.; range 144hours; useful lift 100,000 lbs.

Dimensions: Length 695 ft., diameter 85 ft. 6 in., gas volume2,724,000 cu. ft.

The origins of the ZR-2 can be traced to mid–1918, whenthe British Admiralty awarded Shorts Brothers a contract tobuild an A class rigid airship to be known as the R.38. The Aclass were designed to be “lightweight” dirigibles capable of


R-38 ZR-2

reaching an altitude of 22,000 feet and having a maximumpatrol duration of up to six days. However, World War I endedwhile the R38 was still under construction and the British gov-ernment announced an intent to abandon the project as a cost- savings measure. At nearly the same time, U.S. Navy plans toacquire several German Zeppelins as wartime reparations hadbeen thwarted when the airships were deliberately destroyedby their crews. Thus, in October 1919, before cancellation ofthe R.38 could take effect, the Navy Department agreed to pur-chase the airship for $2,000,000. New specifications called forinstallation of specialized mooring gear which added a ton ofweight forward and had to be offset by an equal amount of bal-last aft. Construction consisted primarily of perforated alu-minum girders, assembled into frames and longerons, and allconnected to an A- frame type keel running the length of theairship. Once the framework was completed and the gas cellsinstalled, an outer covering of linen was sewn into place anddoped.

As the ZR-2/R.38 neared completion during the late springof 1921, 17 U.S. Navy crewmembers arrived at Cardington tobe trained by experienced British airship personnel. With U.S.insignia painted on it sides, the ZR-2 was rolled- out for its firstflight on June 23, 1921. Initial control problems led to a re- balancing of the control surfaces, then three weeks later, on the

second test flight, severe pitching problems resulted in damageto several of the longitudinal girders. Following repairs, a thirdtest flight was completed without incident. On August 23, withall of the Americans aboard, the ZR-2 embarked on a cross- country test run that was intended to simulate the conditionsof an Atlantic crossing. While in the midst of sharp maneuver-ing, disaster struck as a number of longitudinal girders failed,causing the airship to break up and catch on fire. The flamingwreck ultimately fell into the shallows of the Humber Rivernear Hull in Yorkshire; 16 Americans and 32 Britons perishedin the crash. An investigation following the incident revealedthe light structure of the ZR-2/R.38 to have been too weak towithstand even normal aerodynamic loads and that the weightadded forward and aft had been a contributing factor. Since itwas destroyed before delivery, ZR-2 never received an officialship’s name.

ZR-1 Shenandoah—1923


Type: Long- range reconnaissance and bombardment rigid airship.Manufacturer: Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

(constructed at NAS Lakehurst, New Jersey).Total produced: 1 (USN)

Part II: Lighter-Than-Air Development 243

R.38, now ZR-2, as depicted during its first flight from Cardington, England, on June 23, 1921. Note application of U.S. Navy markingsto aft hull and tail fins. Naval officials hoped that the ex–British dirigible would give them a head start in rigid airship operations.


Powerplants: Six (later five) 300-hp Packard 6-cylinder water- cooledinline engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propellers.

Armament: Six .30-cal. Lewis machine guns in single positions andup to 4,000 lbs. of bombs carried internally.

Performance: Max. speed 68 mph at s.1.; ceiling 13,000 ft.; range 5,000mi. (approx. 80 hours); useful lift 48,774 lbs.

Dimensions: Length 680 ft., diameter 78 ft. 9 in., gas volume 2,115,000cu. ft.

The Navy Department authorized NAF to commence workon the ZR-1 in August 1919, two months prior to the purchaseof the R.38/ZR-2. It was the first rigid airship to be built in theUnited States. The general arrangement of the ZR-1 was basedupon that of the German Zeppelin L-49 (LZ-96), a high- altitudeairship which had been forced down over France in 1917 andcarefully dissected afterward. The design was characterized bya high fineness ratio, presenting a very long and slender sideaspect with a cylindrical hull center section, and like the L-49class, the control gondola and engine cars were to be suspendedfrom the hull framework on struts. As detailed engineeringwork on the ZR-1 proceeded, NAF incorporated many of thestructural improvements seen in more recent Zeppelin designsand also selected “duraluminum,” an alloy of copper and alu-minum recently developed by Alcoa, as the airship’s principalstructural material. Moreover, in the wake of the ZR-2 disaster,naval officials determined that the ZR-1 would use non- flammable helium rather than hydrogen as a lifting gas,although its lifting value (in payload) was 9.2 percent less. He-lium, a byproduct of natural gas wells, was such a rare elementat the time that the airship’s 2.1 million+ cubic- foot volume ac-counted for nearly all of the nation’s available reserves.

Fabrication of the ZR-1’s girders and other structural partswas initially delayed by Alcoa’s inability to supply duralu min -um in the quantities needed and did not actually begin untilmid–1921. Thereafter, structural components were manufac -tured at NAF’s Philadelphia plant, and then shipped by rail andtruck to the Navy’s construction shed (Hangar No. 1) at NASLakehurst for assembly and erection. The ZR-1’s 20 individualgas cells were made of goldbeater’s skin, a gas- impervious ma-terial derived from the outer membrane of bovine largeintestine. Assembly of the keel and erection of frames beganin June 1922 and continued for over a year. The outer coveringconsisted of high- quality cotton cloth (i.e., grade “A” fabric),sewn to the duraluminum frame, then sealed with doped- onfabric tapes. Final finish was silver aircraft (nitrate) dope.

The ZR-1’s gas cells were inflated with helium for the firsttime on August 20, 1923 (filled to only 85-capacity to conserve

the expensive gas), and on September 4, the airship made itsfirst flight from Lakehurst under the command of Lt. Cdr. Mau-rice Pierce. A number of proving flights followed to test theZR-1’s airworthiness under various atmospheric conditions suchas rain and fog as well as to train its inexperienced air andground crews in the handling of a large airship. In earlyOctober, amid much publicity, the ZR-1 made a 2,200-mileroundtrip flight to and from St. Louis, Missouri to appear atthe National Air Races. At a ceremony held at Lakehurst onOctober 10, 1923, ZR-1 was christened the USS Shenandoahand officially commissioned as a Navy ship. Soon afterward,Shenandoah completed demonstration flights over New YorkCity, Washington, D.C., and Baltimore and on November 16,for the first time, successfully moored to the new 165- foot- highmast that had been built at Lakehurst for large airshipoperations. To demonstrate the capabilities of a naval airship,BuAer officials began moving forward with a bold plan to takeShenandoah on an Arctic over- flight; however, on January 12,1924, before any further operations could take place, an unex-pected gale- force wind ripped Shenandoah from its mooringon the high mast, destroying the forward hull framework andtop fin; the resulting damage required the airship to be groundedfor repairs until late May. During this time, command changedto Lt. Cdr. Zachary Lansdowne, a highly experienced airshipofficer who had participated in the first Atlantic crossing by anairship aboard the British R.34 in July 1919. While repairs wereunderway, Shenandoah received structural improvements to thenose, mooring assembly, and fins and the sixth engine was re-moved from the aft end of the control gondola and replacedwith new radio equipment. In a decision that would later becontroversial, Lansdowne order the removal of 10 of theairship’s 18 automatic gas valves. These valves, as the airshipgained altitude, automatically released gas to compensate forthe expansion of the cells within the structural framework, andwith the modification, Shenandoah would be restricted to as-cending at no more than 400- feet- per- minute.

When flight operations resumed on May 22, 1924, Lans-downe initiated a series of exercises intended to show the mil-itary hierarchy the potential of using large, rigid airships asscouting vessels within the fleet. From midsummer onwards,Shenandoah took part in numerous tactical exercises with theScouting Fleet and reached an important milestone on August24, when it successfully moored to the USS Patoka (AO-9, laterAV-6). With the ability to replenish lifting gas, fuel, andsupplies at sea, the airship could theoretically operate anywherewith the fleet. Starting in October 1924, Shenandoah captured

USS Shenandoah ZR-1


Top: ZR-1 is seen moored to the new 165-foot-high mast at NAS Lakehurst in late 1923, soon after commissioning. In January 1924,the airship was damaged when a gale force wind ripped it from the mast. Bottom: The general arrangement of Shenandoah wasbased on the design of World War I German Zeppelin LZ-96. The slender aspect (high fineness ratio) of its hull is very evident inthis overhead perspective.

national attention by embarking on a 19-day, coast- to- coast tour,which took it from Lakehurst to San Diego (via Fort Worth),up the Pacific coast to Seattle and back to San Diego, then re-turning to Lakehurst (again via Fort Worth) for a total of 235flight hours logged. Soon after Shenandoah’s return, due to thescarcity of helium on hand, its gas cells were emptied in orderto fill those of the newly arrived ZR-3 (Los Angeles).

Shenandoah spent the first half of 1925 undergoing an ex-tensive refit and did not return to flight operations until lateJune of that year. Thereafter, it commenced a new series ofsummer exercises with the Scouting Fleet, which not only in-cluded mooring to Patoka’s mast but being taken under towwhile the ship was underway. On September 2, 1925, Shenan-doah departed Lakehurst on a promotional tour, this time tothe Midwest with plans to visit 40 cities and moor to a new air-ship mast erected at Dearborn, Michigan. While en route oversoutheastern Ohio the next day, Shenandoah entered a violentstorm containing convection currents (updrafts) that caused itto rise at a rate well above the pressure limits of its helium cells.After a succession of rapid ascents and descents, combinedwith twisting stresses placed on the hull, Shenandoah’s longi-tudinal girders failed and the airship began to break up. Thecontrol gondola separated from the bow and plunged to theground, while three separate segments of the hull floated awayas free balloons. Fourteen crewmen, including Lansdowne,were killed; but 29 managed to survive by riding the free- floating sections to the ground. Unforeseen weather conditionswere determined to have been the cause of the crash. Beforethe flight left, Lansdowne had requested that the entire trip becancelled due to unpredictable weather this time of year overthe planned route but after one postponement, was ordered todepart as planned. Some critics cited Lansdowne’s earlier de-cision to remove the 10 gas relief valves as a major factor. Fi-nally, Karl Arnstein, a German structural engineer employedby the Zeppelin Company who had designed the original L-49and would later work on the designs of Akron and Macon,blamed the structural weakness inherent in the ZR-1’s generaldesign.

ZR-3 (LZ-126) Los Angeles—1924


Type: Long- range training rigid airship.Manufacturer: Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH, Friedrichshafen, Ger-

many.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Five 400-hp Maybach VL-1 12-cylinder water- cooled in-

line engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propellers.Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 65 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range

5,175 mi. (approx. 86 hours); useful lift 66,970 lbs.Dimensions: Length 656 ft. 7 in., diameter 90 ft. 6 in., gas volume

2,471,700 cu. ft.

The destruction of the German war- reparation Zeppelinsin 1919 combined with the loss of the R.38/ZR-2 in 1921 moti-vated Navy planners to look to the German Zeppelin Co. as the

prospective builder of a new rigid airship. On June 23, 1922,after concluding negotiations, a contract was finalized for con-struction of 2,471,000 cubic foot airship to be known internallyas the LZ-126 and carried under the naval designation ZR-3.Part of the airship’s construction cost would be funded as apayment of Germany’s wartime reparation debt to the UnitedStates. Moreover, due to the military limitations imposed bythe post–World War I Versailles Treaty, Germany was restrictedto building new airships for “civil purposes” only, with theresult that the LZ-126/ZR-3 was to be designed as a com -mercial- type dirigible having accommodations for 20 to 30 pas-sengers. As Zeppelin’s detailed engineering work reached finalform, the LZ-126/ZR-3 represented a significant advance inrigid airship design. Unlike Shenandoah and earlier Zeppelindesigns, the LZ-126/ZR-3 emerged with a lower fineness ratio(7.25:1) and a continuous symmetrical curve along the lengthof the hull that produced a more resilient structural framework.Streamlining and strength was further enhanced by mountingthe control gondola directly to the bottom of the hull envelopeand incorporating it into the keel structure.

Construction of LZ-126/ZR-3 at Friedrichshafen, Germanycommenced in mid–1922 and proceeded over the next twoyears. In August 1924, gas cells inflated with hydrogen andstatic testing satisfactorily completed, the airship emerged fromZeppelin’s construction shed and was launched on its first flight,followed, over the next two months, by five more trial runs overGermany that totaled 56 flight hours. In the early hours of Oc-tober 12, 1924, LZ-126/ZR-3 lifted off from Friedrichshafen enroute to North America under the command of Doctor HugoEckner (managing director of the Zeppelin Co.), arriving safelyat NAS Lakehurst on October 15 after an 821⁄2-hour trans atlanticflight. Under the terms of the construction contract, nine Ger-man officers and crewmembers remained behind to train theNavy personnel to fly the new airship. After ZR-3 had beenberthed in Hangar No. 1 next to Shenandoah, the hydrogen wasvented from its gas cells and, since helium was in very shortsupply at the time, ZR-3’s cells were refilled with gas pumpedfrom ZR-1. On November 25, commanded by Capt. George W.Steele and fully manned with a Navy aircrew for the first time,ZR-3 departed Lakehurst for NAS Anacostia, where at a cere-mony held later the same day the airship was christened USSLos Angeles by First Lady Mrs. Calvin Cool idge and commis-sioned as a naval vessel.

From the beginning, BuAer never envisaged operating LosAngeles as a combatant but as a training platform for the largerrigid airships being planned for future naval service (i.e., Akron/Macon); indeed, as a consequence of the international restric-tions placed on the use of German- made airships, it would benecessary to first obtain permission from the Allied ControlCommission before employing ZR-3 in any type of militaryexercise. During the first half of 1925, operating under thepretext of a “transport,” Los Angeles completed two long- distance flights to Bermuda and another to Puerto Rico, on twooccasions rendezvousing with and mooring to the Patoka atsea. Early operations were hindered to some degree by the need


to replace the original gas cells, which deteriorated quickly inthe North American climate, plus maintenance problems withthe Maybach engines compounded by a lack of spares. Com-mand of Los Angeles shifted in May 1926 to Lt. Cmdr. CharlesE. Rosendahl, the former navigator of the Shenandoah, whohad survived the crash by flying the bow section down as a freeballoon.

Between 1926 and 1929, while most of the 1,400 hourslogged by ZR-3 related to aircrew training at Lakehurst, theairship nonetheless managed to accomplish some noteworthy

flights, which included: in 1926, a trip to Dearborn, Michiganto moor at the new mast built by Henry Ford; in 1928, a 40-hour flight to the Panama Canal Zone, with a side trip off Cubato moor with the Patoka, the longest flight the airship wouldrecord; also in 1928, a Ft. Worth publicity tour by way ofChicago; and then in early 1929, a 40-hour flight out to the Gulfof Mexico to moor again with the Patoka. Los Angeles did ex-perience a couple of narrow escapes during this time: one, inAugust 1927, when an unexpected sea breeze caused the airshipto make an 85-degree nose stand on the high mast, but suffering


USS Los Angeles ZR-3

The Los Angeles logged more flight time (4,398 hours) than any other Navy rigid airship. Due it its German origins, post–World War Itreaty restrictions prevented it from being used as a combatant.

only minor damage in the process; and another, off NewportNews, Virginia in January 1928, when an attempted landing onthe new carrier Lexington had to be aborted after the groundcrew lost control.

The years 1929 to 1931 were active ones for the LosAngeles. In June 1929, it moored for the first time to Lakehurst’snew moveable low mast, and during the summer, with its re-cently installed “trapeze” arresting system, made the first “hook- on” with a specially modified Vought UO-1. Los Angelescontinued active operations in rigid aircrew training and aircraftrecovery techniques in anticipation of the planned arrival ofZRS-4 (Akron, 1931) and ZRS-5 (Macon, 1933) and in 1931 and1932, received clearance to participate in the large fleet exercisesconducted during that time. Then in June 1932, having by thattime logged 4,398 hours over the course of some 331 flights,the Navy, as a cost- cutting measure, decommissioned the LosAngeles and stored it in Hangar No. 1 to be used solely for statictraining. Though briefly reactivated in 1933 following the lossof Akron, the airship never flew again. The end came in late

1939, when the Los Angeles was officially stricken from thenaval inventory and thereafter dismantled inside its hangar.

ZMC-2—1929


Type: Experimental metal- clad hybrid airship.Manufacturer: Aircraft Development Corp. (later merged into Detroit

Aircraft Corp.), Detroit, Michigan.Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 220-hp Wright R-790 (J-5) Whirlwind 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropellers.

Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 70 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range

863 mi. (approx. 20 hours); useful lift 2,700 lbs.Dimensions: length 149 ft. 3 in., diameter 52 ft. 7 in., hull volume

202,200 cu. ft.

Whether the hybrid ZMC-2 was a rigid or non- rigid airshipmight be debatable but is classified rigid here due to the nature


Handling rigid airships required a huge ground crew as shown by the number of tiny figures surrounding the high mast in this photo -graph. Scarce manpower was a factor in the decommissioning of ZR-3 in 1932.

of its all- metal hull structure. It was during the early 1920s thatRalph H. Upson, an aeronautical engineer, conceived the pos-sibility of a blimp- like airship using thin plates of “Alclad” (analuminum alloy developed by Alcoa as an aircraft skin) to con-tain the gas volume rather than the more conventional rubber-ized envelope. The design, in theory, would not only minimizeseepage of helium (a large concern at that time) but possessconsiderably more strength than a non- rigid blimp. The com-pany sold the idea to the Navy in 1926, contracting to build asmall, blimp- sized airship (200,000 cu. ft.) as a proof of conceptdemonstrator for a much larger version (750,000+ cu. ft.) thatwould follow later. BuAer assigned the prototype the non- standard designation ZMC-2 (lighter- than- air/metal- clad; 2 =200,000 cu. ft. gas volume), and construction took place overan interval of three years inside a hangar at NRAS Grosse Ile,near the company’s plant in Detroit, Michigan.

The hull structure consisted of 0.08-inch thick Aclad platesbonded to lightweight duraluminum frames and stringers by

approximately 3,000,000 small rivets. Even so, hull integrity,like that of a blimp, relied upon constant gas pressure, aug-mented by internal ballonets, to maintain shape. In order toevenly disperse aerodynamic stresses of the hull plating, ZMC-2 emerged with an extremely rotund side aspect, (i.e., a finenessratio of 2.84:1 compared to 4.36:1 on a J- Type blimp), which,for adequate stability, made it necessary to incorporate eightfins (four with moveable control surfaces) instead of the usualfour. ZMC-2 made its first flight at Grosse Ile on August 20,1929, and arrived at Lakehurst the next month to begin testing.Trials revealed that the airship was more resilient than astandard blimp, however, because of its beamy shape, it provedvery difficult to control in rough air conditions. BuAer, in anyevent, expressed no further interest in procuring a larger MC- type, and Detroit Aircraft went out of business in 1931.

Following official acceptance, ZMC-2 was pressed intoactive service in the LTA training program at Lakehurst. Knownby Navy crews as the “tin bubble” or “tinship,” ZMC-2’s oper-

ational career as a trainer spanned ten years, its lastflight occurring in August 1939, when it had loggedover 2,250 hours flying time. After it was grounded,the airship remained at Lakehurst as a ground testbeduntil being broken- up sometime in 1941.

ZRS-4 and -5 Akron/Macon—1931TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (ZRS-4 [ZRS-5])

Type: Long- range, scouting and aircraft- carrying rigid air-ship.

Manufacturer: Goodyear- Zeppelin Corp., Akron, Ohio.Total produced: 2 (USN)Powerplants: Eight 560-hp Maybach VL-2 12-cylinder

water- cooled inline engines driving two- bladed [three- bladed] fixed- pitch, rotable wooden [metal] propellers.

Armament: Seven flexible .30-cal. machine guns in nose,dorsal, ventral, and tail positions and four Curtiss F9Cfighter aircraft stowed in an internal hangar.

Performance: Max. speed 79 mph [83 mph]; ceiling 26,000ft. (both); range 7,349 mi. (approx. 127 hours) [9,143mi. (approx. 158 hours)]; useful lift 152,644 lbs.[160,644 lbs.].

Dimensions: Length 785 ft., diameter 132 ft. 10 in., gas vol-ume 6,500,000 cu. ft.

ZRS-4 and -5 represented the ultimate (andfinal) evolution of the rigid airship as a naval weaponssystem. Spearheaded by figures like Rear Adm.William A. Moffett of BuAer during the early 1920s,Navy policy shifted its emphasis toward large rigidairships (as opposed to blimps) as the future of theLTA program. Encouraged by recent experience withthe Shenandoah, BuAer pressed forward in 1924 withpreliminary design work for a significantly larger fleet- type scout airship capable of carrying its ownaircraft. In June 1926, after the unexpected loss of theShenandoah, Congress authorized the Navy’s requestto move forward with plans to construct two new rigidairships of 6,000,000 cu. ft. capacity (later increased).


ZMC-2

The very rotund aspect (high fineness ratio) of ZMC-2 is evident in this pho-tograph. Metal cladding made it more durable, but its shape generated han-dling problems in rough air.

Following a design competition, Goodyear- Zeppelin Corp., aconsortium of Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and the German- based Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH, received contracts onMarch 2, 1928 to build two airships as ZRS-4 and -5, the letter“S” denoting the importance of the scouting mission they wouldbe expected to undertake. The concept of operating a rigid air-ship as an airborne aircraft carrier was highly ambitious. Bothairships would possess a “trapeze” system for launching andrecovering aircraft equipped with a “skyhook” arresting system(first tested on Los Angeles during 1929) and could accommo-date up to four aircraft in a 60 ft. by 75 ft. hangar located inthe bottom of the hull. The aircraft were expected to performa dual role, functioning either as scouts to extend the airship’seffective patrol range or as fighters to protect it from outsideair attack.

Construction of ZRS-4 officially started in November 1929inside Goodyear- Zeppelin’s new “airdock” at Akron, and as-sembly of the structural framework began in March 1930. Thenew airship’s design incorporated a unique “deep ring, three- keel” configuration having sufficient longitudinal rigidity toallow the eight engines to be housed entirely within the hullenvelope. This arrangement not only resulted in a dramatic re-duction of drag but also provided far better inflight engine ac-

cess for inspection and maintenance. The propellers, strut- mounted to the hull and connected to the engines via a systemof geared drive shafts, could be vertically rotated through a 90-degree arc to aid close- in maneuvering. An innovative water- recovery system, consisting of vertical condenser panels on thesides of the hull, retrieved water produced by the engine exhaustto compensate for loss of weight as fuel was burned, therebyeliminating the need to valve- off valuable helium. Finishingout proceeded rapidly. On August 8, 1931, at the Goodyear- Zeppelin Airdock, before a crowd of 150,000 people, ZRS-4was christened USS Akron by Mrs. Herbert Hoover, and onSeptember 23, with Lt. Cdr. C. E. Rosendahl in command, leftthe airdock on its first flight. After ten trial flights totaling 124hours, Akron arrived at NAS Lakehurst on October 22 and wascommissioned as a Navy ship one week later. Back in Akron,at virtually the same time, Goodyear- Zeppelin initiated con-struction of the nearly identical ZRS-5.

Akron began operating with the Scouting Fleet off the EastCoast during early 1932, before the trapeze aircraft launch andrecovery system had been installed, and made its first at- seamooring with Patoka on January 16. On May 3, with the trapezein place, successful “hook- ons” were accomplished with botha Consolidated N2Y-1 and the Curtiss XF9C-1 prototype. After


USS Akron ZRS-4

The ZRS-4 Akron, intended to be the vanguard of the Scouting Fleet, was launched in summer of 1931. Cruising out of range of navalguns, the airship’s onboard aircraft could be used to scout ahead or protect it from air attack.


Top: The Macon seen moored to a small mast in Opa Locka, Florida, in spring 1934. Black rectangles above the propellers are con-denser panels that recovered water created by engine exhaust. Bottom: The Macon berthed in its airship shed. Its immense size isapparent from the three people seen standing at the base of the fin. Loss of the Macon in early 1935 spelled the demise of the rigidairship program.

making a transcontinental trip to the newly constructed airshipbase at Sunnyvale, California (later became NAS Moffet Field)in May 1932, Akron, without aircraft aboard, participated inWest Coast fleet operations during early June. It returned toLakehurst later the same month, and for the rest of the year,pending delivery of its aircraft complement (F9C-2s), engagedin local flight testing and further hook- on experiments with theN2Ys and XF9C. On April 4, 1933, while proceeding up theNortheast Coast to calibrate its radio direction- finding equip-ment, Akron was caught in a storm and plunged into the seaoff New Jersey. In the world’s largest aviation disaster up tothat time, 60 out of the 63 people aboard perished in the crash,including Rear Adm. Moffett.

On March 11, 1933, just weeks before Akron crashed, ZRS-5 was christened USS Macon at the Akron airdock. It incorpo-rated a number of structural improvements that produced anempty weight 8,000 lbs. less than that of ZRS-4. Less weight,combined with more efficient three- bladed metal propellers andbetter streamlining, gave it a 4 mph increase in top speed andextended range by almost 1,800 miles. Macon completed itsfirst flight on April 21, 1933, and was commissioned two monthslater at Akron by the new Chief of BuAer, Rear Adm. ErnestJ. King. It was delivered to Lakehurst in late June and over thenext several months, continued flight trials and initiated hook- on testing with N2Y-1s and the new F9C-2s. The airship leftLakehurst on October 12, 1933 and made a three-day transit toits new home base at NAS Moffett Field in California. Through-out most of early 1934, with its HTA unit aboard (three F9C-2s and a Waco XJW-1 utility aircraft), Macon participated inmajor fleet exercises on both coasts. In most instances, however,naval officials scored the airship as having been “destroyed”by carrier- based aircraft before it had had the opportunity tomake a contribution to the scouting problem. In April 1934,while en route from Moffett Field to Opa Locka, Florida,Macon encountered severe turbulence that twisted the framerings and girders underlying the attachment of the fins. Follow-ing repairs, the airship resumed operations, but plans to com-pletely rebuild and strengthen the structure would be delayeduntil the overhaul period scheduled for early 1935.

Despite the poor showing earlier, Macon continued torefine tactics and procedures in the deployment of its HTA unit.From mid–1934 on, the F9Cs flew numerous sorties to rehearsenew types of navigational problems and improved their rangeby operating from the trapeze without landing gear; and by late1934, scouting results in various fleet problems had measurablyimproved. On February 11, 1935, a month prior to a plannedoverhaul, Macon left Moffett Field to join a small fleet tacticalexercise off the California coast. The next day, while returningto base, disaster struck as a sudden gust of turbulence rippedaway the dorsal fin and punctured three of the aft gas cells.After dropping water ballast to correct the extreme up angle,the airship rose above pressure limits and automatically valved- off too much helium. Twenty- four minutes later, Macon settledin the ocean and began sinking; the crew abandoned ship and81 of 83 persons aboard survived. Although BuAer studied

newer designs (i.e., the ZRCV) until 1940, Macon’s loss effec-tively ended further rigid airship operations.

NON-RIGID AIRSHIPS (BLIMPS)Synopsis of Non- Rigid Airship

Procurement

U.S. Navy interest in non- rigid airships arose in 1915 afterobserving the use of various types by foreign navies in thecoastal patrol role. The British termed them “blimps,” whichis thought to have originally been a contraction of “British B- type airship” and the word “limp.” In any event, the first American- made blimp, the Connecticut Aircraft Co. DN-1, wasdeemed unsatisfactory by the Navy and scrapped soon afterbeing flight- tested in April 1917. But even before DN-1 hadflown, the Navy Department issued contracts in early 1917 toGoodyear, B.F. Goodrich, and Connecticut Aircraft for the man-ufacture of 16 envelopes for a small class of airship similar indesign to the British Admiralty’s Submarine Scout series. Cur-tiss received a separate order to built control cars from modifiedJN-4 trainer fuselages. These airships had been procured toform the first elements of a training fleet for the Navy’s newlyorganized LTA program. By the time the first example arrivedfor testing in June 1917, it became B-1 under a new alpha -numeric designation system for blimps, although the DN-1 hadnever been identified as A-1. All 16 B- class blimps were deliv-ered during 1918; Goodyear subsequently rebuilt three with newcontrol cars that returned to service as B-17, -18, and -19, plusGoodyear completed a seventeenth example in 1919 as B-20.The B- class continued in the training role until the lastexamples were withdrawn in 1924. Thirty larger C- class airshipshad been ordered in early 1918, but, in the interval, to get blimpsinto overseas operations faster, the Navy also acquired a numberof foreign- built airships: (1) six from Britain—three SST twin- engine Sea Scouts, two single- engine SSZ Sea Scouts, and one twin- engine North Sea type; (2) nine from France—five twin- engine Astra- Torres AT- types, three Zodiac- Vedette VZ- types,and one Zodiac ZDUS- type (delivered in 1919); and (3) onefrom Italy, a twin- engine semi- rigid (i.e., rigid keel) type listedas O-1. Disposition of most foreign airships after the war is un-certain, however, official Navy records show that O-1 was op-erated out of Cape May, New Jersey from 1919 to 1921 and theFrench ZDUS turned over to the Army in 1919.

The 10 C- class airships (out of 30 ordered) delivered be-tween September 1918 and March 1919, were twin- engine types,twice the size of the B- class, and the first American- madeblimps that could carry armament; however, due to rapid dete-rioration of gas envelopes, their service life was brief, and allhad been withdrawn by the end of 1922. Two smaller blimps,E-1 delivered in late 1918 and F-1 in early 1919, were used fortraining and testing until 1923 and 1924. Intended as successorsto the C- class, five D- class blimps (out of 20 ordered in 1918)entered service during 1920, four of which were transferred to


the Army in 1921 and the fifth (D-6) destroyed the same yearin a hangar fire at NAS Rockaway, New York. One very small H- class “pony blimp” procured for evaluation in 1921 was lostin the same the hangar fire with D-6. The first postwar patrolairship design, J-1, was test flown in 1922, but after unsatisfac-tory trials, the similar J-2 was cancelled, and when J-1 was with-drawn in mid–1924, there were no blimps remaining on thenaval inventory. Lack of trainers in the LTA program led BuAerto order two of Army Airship TC- type envelopes fromGoodyear in 1925, the first entering service in as J-3 in 1926,followed by the second as J-4 in 1927. In April 1933, J-3 waslost at sea while searching for Akron survivors, while J-4 con-tinued in the training role at Lakehurst until stricken in March1940.

In 1929, BuAer commenced development of K-1, a largertype of blimp that incorporated recent innovations seen onGoodyear’s Defender class civil airships. K-1 completed its firstflight in August 1931 and though plagued by poor handling qual-ities, served as a trainer until being grounded in 1940. To furtheraugment the LTA training fleet (i.e., ZMC-2, J-4, and K-1), ex–Goodyear Defender was taken into service in 1935 as G-1.(Note, the original G- class of 1919 had never been built.) Whenthe Army disbanded its Airship Service in 1937, two of itsblimps were transferred to the Navy: TC-14, the newer of thetwo, entered service in 1938; and TC-13, which needed a newenvelope, was delayed until 1940. The Navy added two moreblimps to the LTA inventory in 1938: L-1, a small Goodyear En-terprise class airship, joined the training fleet in April; and themuch larger K-2 arrived in December. Sharing little in commonwith its K-1 predecessor, K-2 was not only the largest blimpever placed on the naval inventory up to that time but also thefirst in over 15 years to be envisaged for a true combat role.Testing and evaluation over the next two years confirmed thatK-2 was very well suited for its designed missions of antisub-marine patrol and convoy escort. As part of the general NavalAviation buildup of 1940, Congress authorized the LTA pro-gram to expand to an eventual level of 48 blimps. To start theprocess, BuAer gave Goodyear a contract in late 1940 to man-ufacture six new K-2 types for patrol operations (ZP) and twomore L- types for training (ZN). Five of the new blimps hadbeen delivered before the end of 1941, L-2 and -3 arriving atNAS Lakehurst in February and June, respectively, while K-3,-4, and -5 all enteredservice between Sep-tember and Novem ber;K-6, -7, and -8 followedthem in early 1942.

As a consequenceof wartime programsfrom 1942 to 1945, theNavy’s LTA service tookdelivery of 146 moreblimps: seven G- types (ZNN- G); 19 L- types (ZNN- L), five of which

had been commandeered from Goodyear’s civil fleet; 129 K- types (ZNP- K); and in 1943 and 1944, four M- Types (ZNP- M),which were 40 percent larger than the Ks. The very last G and K- types were not withdrawn from active service until 1959.

B- Class—1917

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (GOODYEAR B-1THROUGH -9)

Type: Three- place patrol and training non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio; B.F.

Goodrich Co., Akron, Ohio; Connecticut Aircraft Co., NewHaven, Connecticut: and Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co., GardenCity, New York (gondolas and engines).

Total produced: 17 (USN)Powerplant: One 100-hp Curtiss OXX-2 8-cylinder water- cooled V-

type engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 47 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range

927 mi. (approx. 261⁄2 hours); useful lift 1,840 lbs.Dimensions: Length 163 ft., diameter 31 ft. 6 in., envelope volume

77,000 cu. ft.

The B- class is noteworthy in having been the first airshipto enter operational service with the U.S. Navy, even thoughthe DN-1 (A- class, though never officially assigned) was thefirst type actually procured and tested. About the time the DN-1 was delivered in late 1916, the Navy Department determinedthat it would also need a number of smaller non- rigid airshipsfor training purposes. The design selected for what would be-come the B- class was similar in size and configuration to theBritish Admiralty’s Submarine Scout (SS) series, relativelysmall coastal patrol airships (60,000 to 70,000 cu. ft.) whichused an off- the- shelf aircraft fuselage (BE.2) as a combinationengine and control gondola. In order to obtain the 16 B- classairships within the time needed, due to the limited productioncapabilities in the U.S., contracts were issued in early 1917 tothree companies for the envelopes—nine from Goodyear, fivefrom Goodrich, and two from Connecticut Aircraft (builder ofthe DN-1)—plus a separate contract with Curtiss to provide JN-4 fuselages and tractor- mounted OXX- type engines. The mod-ified JN-4 fuselage, like the arrangement seen on SS types, wassuspended from cables attached to the envelope with fingerpatches and used flotation gear in place of wheels.


B-Class

B-1, the first example to be completed by Goodyear,arrived for initial evaluations in June 1917. Thereafter, as de-liveries of B- class airships continued, most were placed in serv-ice with the newly established LTA training program at baseson the east and southeast U.S. coasts, though some also flewcoastal patrol sorties off the East Coast, and on at least one oc-casion, a B- class operating out of Chatham, Massachusetts isknown to have spotted a U- boat and called- in seaplanes for anattack. B- class airships differed according to the manufacturer:some had twin ventral fins and rudders and others only one;the Goodrich built examples (B-10 through -14) were slightlylarger (length 167 ft., diameter 33 ft., volume 80,000 cu. ft.);and the two completed by Connecticut Aircraft (B-15 and -16)were shorter and fatter (length 156 ft., diameter 35 ft., volume75,000 cu. ft.) and powered by 100-hp Hall- Scott A-7 engines.Goodyear rebuilt three of its original Bs with new gondolas asB-17, -18, and -19, and sometime in 1919, built the all- new B-20 featuring a revised gondola and an OXX-3 engine. AfterWorld War I, B- class airships continued to serve in the trainingrole until the final examples were withdrawn in 1924.

C- Class—1918

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (GOODYEAR- BUILT)

Type: Four- place patrol non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio; B.F.

Goodrich Co., Akron, Ohio; and Burgess Div. of Curtiss Aero-plane & Motor Co., Marblehead, Massachusetts (gondolas).

Total produced: 10 (USN)Powerplants: Two 150-hp Wright- Hispano A 8-cylinder water- cooled

V- type engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propellers.Armament: One flexible .303-cal. Lewis machine gun and 270 lbs. of

bombs.Performance: Max. speed 60 mph at s.1.; ceiling 8,600 ft.; range 1,440

mi. (approx. 311⁄2 hours); useful lift 4,050 lbs.Dimensions: Length 196 ft., diameter 42 ft. 0 in., envelope volume

181,000 cu. ft.

Though arriving too late to see action in World War I, the C- class was the first American- built non- rigid airship to possessreal combat capability in terms of range and offensivearmament and also the first to use helium rather than hydrogenas a lifting gas. To achieve the useful lift needed to carry a


The Goodyear-built B-1, first operational blimp in the naval inventory. Note lower twin fin and rudder arrangement. Later Bs hada single lower fin, and envelope shape varied according to manufacturer.

much larger payload, the C- class emerged with over twicethe gas volume of the preced-ing B- class. It featured twopusher engines mounted to thesides of a boat- like gondolathat housed four crew stations,fuel, and armament. In early1918, once the design had beenfinalized, the Navy De part -ment ordered 30 gas envelopesfrom Goodyear and Goodrichand gave a separate contract tothe Burgess Division of Curtissto build the gondolas and en-gine mounts.

C-1, the first of the classto be completed, made its firstflight from Akron on Septem-ber 30, 1918, and was deliveredto the Navy three weeks later,after flying nonstop to NASAnacostia. Due to armisticecutbacks, the contract was sub-sequently limited to 10 air -ships, and the last C- class wasdelivered in March 1919. Twowere transferred to the recentlyorganized Army Airship Serv-ice. In the immediate postwarperiod, the Navy used the im-proved capabilities of the Cs toachieve some noteworthy firstsin airship operations, which in-cluded the first aircraft releaseexperiment with a Curtiss JN-4, the first atsea refueling witha submarine chaser, and thefirst transcontinental flightacross the U.S. In May 1919, si-multaneous with an attempt bythe Curtiss NC-1, -2, and -4


C-Class

Top: C-6, erected and flown for the first time at San Diego in March 1920, was the first class ofNavy blimp to possess true combat capability. The airship was lost in September 1920 while enroute to fleet maneuvers. Bottom: A later C-class blimp, possibly C-7 before side lettering had beenapplied. Piloted by Lieutenant Commander Zachary Lansdowne, C-7 made the first flight of ahelium-filled airship in December 1921.

flying boats (see under Patrol Aircraft), the Navy planned tomake an Atlantic crossing with the airship C-5. The airshipcompleted the first leg of its journey on May 15, a 1,022-mileflight from NAS Montauk, New York to St. Johns, Newfound-land, but while on the ground with no crew aboard, was rippedfrom the line- handler’s hands by high winds, swept out to sea,and lost. Due to deterioration of the envelopes, the operationalcareer of the C- types was relatively brief, the last two examplesbeing deflated and withdrawn in 1922.

E /F- Class—1918TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (E-1[F-1])

Type: Three- place training and engine- testing non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio.Total produced: 2 (USN)Powerplant: One 145-hp Thomas- Morse 8-cylinder V- type [125-hp

Union 6-cylinder inline] water- cooled engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.

Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 56 mph [52 mph] at s.1.; ceiling 8,000 ft.;

range 695 mi. [1,414 mi.] (approx. 20 hours [40 hours]); usefullift 2,050 lbs. [2,300 lbs.].

Dimensions: Length 162 ft. 0 in., diameter 33 ft. 0 in., envelope volume95,000 cu. ft.

Similar in size and configuration to the B- Class, Goodyearcompleted three small airships in late 1918, two of which wereaccepted by the Navy as E-1 and F-1 and one sold to the Armyas A-1. Except for small differences in the engine mounts, E-1and F-1 were identical, both having an open, boat- type controlgondola with a single pusher engine mounted at the stern. Un-like earlier non- rigid designs, these two small airships incor-porated a fuel tank inside the envelope between the ballonetsrather than in the gondola. Delivered to NAS Pensacola in De-cember 1918, E-1 served in the airship training program untilmid–1924, when it was removed due to its worn condition; F-1, delivered to NAS Hampton Roads in February 1919, operatedas an engine testbed until being deflated and stricken from theinventory in late 1923.

D- Class—1920

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (D-1 THROUGH D-5)

Type: Four- place patrol non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio; B.F.

Goodrich Co., Akron, Ohio; and Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadel-phia, Pennsylvania (control gondola on D-6).

Total produced: 6 (USN)


Completed by Goodyear in 1918, airship E-1 is seen over Pensacola in the fall of 1920. E-1 and F-1 were identical except for smalldetails. E-1 was used as a trainer until mid–1924, F-1 as an engine testbed until late 1923.

E-Class

Powerplants: Two 125-hp Union 6-cylinder water- cooled inline enginesdriving two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propellers.

Armament: One flexible .303-cal. Lewis machine gun and 270 lbs. ofbombs.

Performance: Max. speed 58 mph at s.1.; ceiling 8,600 ft.; range 1,480mi. (approx. 37 hours); useful lift 4,340 lbs.

Dimensions: Length 198 ft., diameter 58 ft., envelope volume 190,000cu. ft.

The Navy Department approved the design of a new D- class armed patrol airship in July 1918 as the successor to the C- Class. Changes included a six- foot extension of the C- typeenvelope and a re-design of the controlgondola which in-cluded suspendingthe fuel tanks fromthe sides of the enve-lope and mountingthe two pusher en-gines further aft.Twenty new air-ships were originallyplanned, however,due to armistice cut-backs, the order wasreduced to three man-ufactured by Good -year (D-1, -3, and -4)

and two by Goodrich (D-2 and -5). D-1was destroyed by fire in Good year’shangar before it could be tested and D-3 became the first of the class to fly onJuly 13, 1920. Testing revealed that thefuel system was unsatis factory due toleakage in the lines. In 1921, after lessthan a year of evaluations, all four of theairships were transferred to the Army.D-6, also completed in 1920, differedfrom the rest of the series in having a C- type Goodyear envelope that used a

control gondola designed and built by NAF.The boat- type gondola was fully enclosed and contained

the fuel tanks inside it.In August 1921, while assigned to NAS Rockaway, New

York, D-6 was destroyed in a hangar fire that also included C-1and H-1.

H- Class (Pony Blimp)—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Two- place observation non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio.Total produced: 2 (USN)Powerplant: One 60-hp Laurance (R-223) 3-cylinder air- cooled radial

engine driving a two- bladed fixed- pitch wooden propeller.Armament: None.Performance: Max. speed 50 mph at s.1.; ceiling 6,000 ft.; range 400

mi. (approx. 7 hours); useful lift 1,146 lbs.Dimensions: Length 94 ft., diameter 30 ft. 10 in., envelope volume

43,030 cu. ft.

Known variously as the “Pony Blimp” or “Motorized KiteBalloon,” the H- class was the smallest non- rigid airship to havebeen operated by the Navy. The type was envisaged as atethered observation balloon, capable of navigating from onelocation to another under its own power. The first of twoordered, H-1 was completed by Goodyear and delivered to NASRockaway, New York, by rail in May 1921 and once assembled


D-Class

H-Class

One of the five D-Class blimps that entered Navy service in 1920.Envelope-mounted fuel tanks are clearly visible.

and inflated, began a series of test flights during the middle ofthe summer. On August 5, 1921, its seventh flight, engine failurecaused a crash landing that pitched both its occupants from thegondola, with the airship drifting away until it settled in a pas -ture where it was caught and tethered by a farmer. After beingdeflated and returned to NAS Rockaway for storage, H-1 wasdestroyed only weeks later in a hangar fire. The second H-Classairship on order was delivered directly to the Army as the OB-1.

J- Class—1922TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (J-4)

Type: Five- to six- place patrol non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio.Total produced: 3 (USN)

Powerplants: Two 220-hp Wright J-5 R-790 Whirlwind 9-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch metal pro-pellers.

Armament: None installed.Performance: Max. speed 60 mph at s.1.; ceiling 8,000 ft.; range 970


210,600 cu. ft.

The J- class arose out of a joint effort in 1921 between theNavy and Goodyear to incorporate recent experience gainedwith the C and D- type patrol airships into a new design, result-ing in a contract being awarded to build two airships as J-1 and-2. Compared to the C and D- classes, J-1 emerged with a some-what smaller envelope (175 ft. 6 in. long, 173,00 cu. ft. volume)along with a fully enclosed control gondola, two 150-hp Wright-


Flown in mid–1921, H-1 was the smallest blimp ever placed on the naval inventory. It was destroyed later the same year in a hangarfire at NAS Rockaway, New York.

Drawings not to scale.J-Class

Hispano A water- cooled V-8 en-gines (tractor- mounted for the firsttime), and a single ballonetarrangement copied from theFrench Zodiac class airships.However, after making its firstflight on August 31, 1922, testingof the J-1 revealed serious controland trim problems related to theshortcomings of its single bal lo -net, which had not been used pre-viously on a helium- filled airship.As a result, the J-2 envelope wascancelled and J-1 was removedfrom service sometime in 1924,leaving the Navy with no non- rigid airships remaining in its in-ventory.

To fill the need for a tran -sition trainer in the rigid airshiptraining program at NAS Lake-hurst, the Navy acquired ArmyAirship TC-2 in 1925 and placed it into service as J-3. In addi-tion to a larger envelope (210,600 cu. ft.), J-3 differed from J-1in having an open control gondola and 150-hp Laurance (laterWright) air- cooled radial engines. Then in 1927, to augment

J-3, the control gondola originally built for J-2 was fitted to an-other TC- type envelope, upgraded with Wright J-5 engines,and put into operation as J-4. J-3 and -4, together with ZMC-2after mid–1929, formed the nucleus for training aircrews at


Above: J-4, launched in 1927, combined the unused gondola of J-2 with an Army TC-type envelope. It remained part of the NASLakehurst LTA training fleet until 1940. Below: The J-4 gondola, built by the Naval Aircraft Factory, featured a planing hull forwater landings. It was the last type of gondola to be suspended from the envelope by cables.

Lakehurst in preparation for duty aboard the much larger rigidairships. In April 1933, J-3 was lost while searching off the NewYork coast for survivors of the Akron (ZRS-4) wreck, with fiveof its seven crewmembers being ultimately rescued. During thesummer of 1933, J-4 transferred to NAS Moffett Field in Sun-nyvale, California to support training operations with the newlycommissioned Macon (ZRS-5), but returned to NAS Lakehurstin May 1935 following the loss of Macon and the terminationof the rigid airship program, and continued there as a traineruntil stricken from the naval inventory in March 1940.

K-1-Class—1931

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (K-1)

Type: Five- to six- place experimental non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron Ohio; Naval Air-

craft Factory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (control gondola).Total produced: 1 (USN)Powerplants: Two 300-hp Wright J-6-9 R-975 Whirlwind 9-cylinder


Armament: None installed.


K-1

The one-of-a-kind K-1, flown for the first time in August 1931. Sharing many design features with the Goodyear’s civil Defender class,it served as a trainer and tested various airship design concepts until grounded in 1940.

Performance: Max. speed 63 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range1,886 mi. (approx. 41 hours); useful lift 7,684 lbs.

Dimensions: Length 219 ft. 2 in., diameter 53 ft. 11 in., envelope volume319,000 cu. ft.

BuAer commenced development of the K-1 design duringthe late 1920s, but with the onset of the Great Depression in1929, was forced to place construction plans on hold. In the in-terval since completion of the J- class for the Navy and TC- class for the Army, Goodyear had introduced many design in-novations in its growing fleet of civil non- rigid airships (i.e.,six new blimps launched by the end of 1929), and by 1930, theNavy was ready to move forward, contracting with Goodyearto manufacture the envelope and with NAF the control gondola.Though twice its size, K-1’s envelope was similar in shape tothat of Good year’s civil Defender class (see G- class, below) and like it, mated the controlgondola directly to the bottom of the en -velope by using cables attached to a catenarycurtain incorporated within the envelope it-self. One of its most noteworthy features wasfueling the engines with “blaugas” (similarto pro pane) instead of gasoline. This enabledfuel to be contained wholly within the enve-lope in a separate ballonet, and because itsweight and density was similar to ambientair, eliminated the need to valve- off heliumas fuel burned.

Following assembly of its components,K-1 completed its first flight from NAS Lake-hurst on August 31, 1931. Flight trials, whiledemonstrating a significant increase in rangeover previous classes, indicated a tendencyof K-1 to trim tail low in level flight, whichlimited speed and affected handling. Fromlate 1931 to mid–1933, K-1 was based atCGAS Cape May, New Jersey (which pos-sessed an airship shed originally built for the ill- fated ZR-2), after which it returned toLakehurst, serving there until it wasgrounded in September 1940. K-1 was there-

after used for mooring and snow removal experiments untilbeing scrapped in October 1941.

G- Class (ZNN- G)—1935

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (G-1)

Type: Eight- place training and utility non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron, Ohio.Total produced: 8 (USN)Powerplants: Two 165-hp Wright J-6-5 R-540 Whirlwind 5-cylinder


Armament: None installed.Performance: Max. speed 57 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range

800 mi. (approx. 17 hours); useful lift 4,115 lbs.


G-1, acquired in 1935 to augment the LTA training fleet at NAS Lakehurst, is showndropping a parachutist. The airship was destroyed June 1942 in a midair collisionwith L-1.

G-Class

Dimensions: Length 186 ft. 8 in., diameter 42 ft. 10 in., envelopevolume 183,000 cu. ft.

The original naval G- class, designed in 1919, was neverbuilt. In September 1935, after determining the need to acquireanother airship for training and utility purposes, BuAerbypassed the normal procurement process by directly pur -chasing Defender, the largest blimp in Goodyear’s civil fleet,and placing it on the inventory as G-1. As part of the transaction,Defender, which had been first launched in 1929, received anew envelope increasing its volume from 179,000 to 183,000cubic feet. G-1 was delivered to NAS Lakehurst on October 5,1935 to operate alongside ZMC-2, J-4, and K-1 in the Navy’sscaled back LTA program. Sometime after being placed in op-eration, G-1 received an upgrade to 225-hp Wright J-6-7engines, which upped top speed to 62 mph.On June 8, 1942, in the vicinity of Lake-hurst at night, G-1 was wrecked in a midaircollision with L-1 (see below) in which 12lives were lost. During the course of WorldWar II, the Navy procured seven more G- types (G-2 through G-8, as ZNN- G underthe airship designation system applied after1940) which differed in having envelopevolume increased to 196,700 cubic feet and220-hp Continental R-670 engines. All ofthe new G- types were subsequently as-signed to ZJ-1 (Airship Utility SquadronOne) with detachments serving at NASLakehurst and NAS Moffett Field. The lastactive G- type was retired from naval serv-ice in 1959.

TC-13 and -14—1938

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TC-14)

Type: Ten- place patrol non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.,

Akron, Ohio.Total produced: 2 (Army, USN)Powerplants: Two 375-hp Pratt & Whitney R-

985-2 Wasp Junior 9-cylinder air- cooled

radial engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propellers.Armament: None originally, however, both were later modified to

mount one flexible .30-cal. machine forward and aft in the controlgondola and provision to carry an unspecified number and weightof depth charges.

Performance: Max. speed 67 mph at s.1.; ceiling (not reported); range2,000 mi. (approx. 43 hours); useful lift 5,991 lbs.

Dimensions: Length 235 ft. 6 in., diameter 54 ft., envelope volume374, 850 cu. ft.

TC-13 was originally delivered to the Army in 1932, TC-14 following it in 1934. Both had been designed to aspecification for long- range coastal patrol and reconnaissance,and when launched, were the largest type of non- rigid airshipsthen in military service (about 15 percent larger than K-1).Though similar in general outline to the G- class, they were


TC-13

One of two Army blimps transferred to the Navy in 1937, TC-14 was reassembled andflown in 1938. At the time, it was the largest blimp on the naval inventory and the onlyone to have combat patrol range.

readily distinguishable by their twin ventral fins and more an-gular control gondolas. When the Army decided to disband itsAirship Service in 1937, both airships were dismantled andturned over to the Navy. TC-14, which was in the better con -dition of the two, was reassembled and inflated at NAS Lake-hurst during 1938. Until joined by K-2 later in the year, it wasthe only airship on naval inventory having any long- range patrolcapability. TC-13 was placed in storage at NAS Moffett Fieldpending delivery of a new envelope and as a consequence, notinflated and flown again (at Lakehurst) until 1940. Whether ornot TC-13 and -14 ever received a ZN designation (i.e., ZNP- TC) is not reflected in historical references.

Starting in 1940, BuAer directed installation of arma-ment—machine guns and depth chargeracks—on both TC- types in preparationfor combat patrol duties. In late 1941,TC-13 and -14, together with the four K-2-types, three L- types and G-1, com-menced flying patrol missions off theAtlantic Coast; then in January 1942,the two TC- types were deflated andshipped by rail to NAS Moffett Field,where, after being reassembled and in-flated, formed the nucleus of ZP-32, thefirst West Coast LTA combat patrolunit. Both remained on combat statusuntil 1943, when they were replaced bynewly arrived K-2-types. Afterward,they were based at Moffett and operatedby the LTA school in training and utilityroles.

L- Class (ZNN- L)—1938TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (L-1)

Type: Four- place training non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber

Co., Akron, Ohio.Total produced: 22 (USN)Powerplants: Two 145-hp Warner R-500-2

Super Scarab 7-cylinder air- cooled radial engines driving two- bladed fixed- pitch metal propellers.

Armament (added later): Two 234-lb. depth charges.Performance: Max. speed 60 mph at s.1.; ceiling 9,000 ft.; range 520


123,000 cu. ft.

The L- class ultimately went on to become the Navy’s stan-dard blimp trainer of the wartime period. In 1937, to augmentexisting blimps in the LTA training program at NAS Lakehurst,BuAer ordered L-1, a small non- rigid design based uponGoodyear’s Enterprise class of civil airships first launched in1934. L-1 was completed and delivered to Lakehurst in April


L-8

The first in a series of training blimps based on Goodyear’s civil Enterprise class, L-1 wasdelivered to NAS Lakehurst in April 1938. The identical L-2 and -3 joined the LTA trainingfleet during 1941.

1938. On September 25, 1940, as part of a general naval expan-sion following the outbreak of war in Europe, BuAer orderedL-2 and -3 from Goodyear, and both new airships were addedto the LTA training program at Lakehurst during 1941 under thenew airship designation ZNN- L. Following U.S. entry intoWorld War II in December 1941, the Navy impressed five En-terprise class blimps from Goodyear’s advertising fleet, whichwere placed in service as L-4 through L-8. During the earlymonths of the war, L- types at Lakehurst were pulled off trainingduties, armed with two depth charges, and assigned to fly an-tisubmarine patrol missions along the eastern seaboard.

One of the great unsolved mysteries of World War II in-volved L-8 (ex–Goodyear Ranger). On the morning of Au-gust 16, 1942, after departing NAS Treasure Island to patrol theocean area west of San Francisco Bay, the airship radioed thatit was “investigating a suspicious oil slick.” Hours later, L-8was seen drifting off Fort Funston (near the Golden Gate), thencame to rest, fully intact with no one aboard, on a street in DalyCity. No trace of its two- man crew was ever found and the cause of their disappearance remains unknown to this day. Thenext four L- types, L-9 through L-12, were assembled in theshops at NAS Moffett Field, the center of all wartime LTA train-ing, and placed in operation during April 1943. Ten more L- types ordered from Goodyear in February 1943 (L-13 throughL-22) were all in service by the end of the year. Once WorldWar II ended, a number of the L- types were returned to Good -year.

K-2-Class (ZNP- K)—1938

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (K-2)

Type: Ten- to twelve- place patrol non- rigid airship.Manufacturer: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron, Ohio.Total produced: 133 (USN)Powerplant: two 500-hp Pratt & Whitney R-1340-6 Wasp 9-cylinder

air- cooled radial engines driving three- bladed fixed- pitch metalpropellers.

Armament: four 355-lb. depth charges; two flexible .30-cal. machineguns, each mounted forward and aft in the control gondola in K-2 through K-8, and from K-14, one flexible 50-cal. machine gunin the upper forward control gondola.

Performance: max. speed 75 mph at s.1.; ceiling 10,000 ft.; range 1,950mi. (approx. 34 hours); useful lift 9,400 lbs.

Dimensions: length 246 ft. 0 in., diameter 57 ft. 10 in., envelopevolume 404,000 cu. ft.

Procured under the same contract as the L-1 on August 11,1937, K-2 (which had very little in common with K-1) becamethe template for the mass- produced K- series of the wartime era(133 delivered by the end of 1945). Over 20 percent larger thanK-1, it represented a reversal of BuAer’s unofficial bias againstprocuring non- rigid airships over 200,000 cubic feet in volume.At the time K-2 completed its delivery flight to NAS Lakehurston December 16, 1938, it was the largest non- rigid airship everplaced on the naval inventory and the first since J-1 to be en-visaged for a combat role. Testing and evaluation of K-2 overthe next two years not only indicated superior performance andhandling compared to K-1, but revealed that it was particularly well- suited for its designed mission of antisubmarine patroland convoy escort.

As a component of the unprecedented expansion of navalaviation authorized by Congress in mid–1940 (i.e., an eventualbuildup to an operational level of 48 non- rigid airships), BuAerawarded Goodyear a contract to manufacture six new K-2-types(K-3 through K-8) under the designation ZNP- K.

They were very similar in details to K-2 except for a switchto 420-hp Wright R-975-28 engines. While all were to beequipped for patrol duties, K-3, -4, -7, and -8 were initially ear-marked to serve as transition trainers for the much larger non-rigid fleet envisioned. K-3, -4, and -5 arrived for servicebetween September and November of 1941 and immediatelycommenced offshore patrols as part of the newly formed ZP-12, but the remaining six were not delivered until early 1942.

As a consequence of wartime contracts issued to Goodyearby the Navy from January 1942 to mid–1943, a total of 130 ad-ditional K-2-types were placed on order (K-9 through K-136,though the last four were ultimately cancelled) and by early1943, Goodyear was producing them at a rate of 11 per month.From K-9 upwards, the production standard changed to 550-hp R-1340-AN2 engines and envelopes enlarged to 416,000cubic feet. With K-14, envelopes increased again to 425,000cubic feet and a new upper deck added to the control gondolato include a flexible .50-cal. machine gun mount forward. Otherwartime enhancements included radar, sonar buoys, magneticanomaly detection (MAD) equipment, and long- range


K-2

(LORAN) radio navigation systems. K- ships performed a vitalrole in antisubmarine warfare, convoy escort, and search andrescue, operating from nine different stations in the U.S. withoverseas detachments in no less than sixteen locations spreadthroughout the various theaters of the war. Their ability to hoverand to operate at low altitudes and airspeeds gave them capa-bilities unmatched by conventional aircraft. One of the great

legacies of the wartime LTA service was that it never lost a shipin a convoy it was escorting.

Many K- types remained in service following the end ofhostilities, some being refitted with 527,000 cubit footenvelopes and further modernized with advanced ASW equip-ment and weapons. The last K- ship (originally delivered as K-43) was retired from active service in March 1959.


K-3 seen upon delivery to NAS Lakehurst in September 1941. K-3, -4, and -5, as part of the hastily formed ZP-12, commenced offshorepatrols in November 1941. The Navy had taken delivery of 133 K-types by the end of 1945.

AIRCRAFT CARRIERS

Synopsis of Aircraft Carrier Procurement

When the U.S. Congress voted to authorize the Navy’s firstaircraft carrier in July 1919, it placed Naval Aviation on thesteepest of learning curves. Taking inspiration from the flush flightdeck arrangement seen on the British Royal Navy’s HMSArgus, a converted merchant liner, the Navy Department pro-ceeded with similar plans to convert an existing vessel ratherthan expend funds on a new ship. USS Jupiter, previously acoal collier, underwent a twoyear conversion process at theMare Island Naval Shipyard and returned to commission onMarch 20, 1922, as the USS Langley (CV-1), a 12,700 ton flush- deck aircraft carrier. But even before Langley had the chanceto commence deck trials with aircraft, the U.S. Governmentratified the Washington Naval Treaty, which, among otherthings, required the Navy to suspend construction of two largebattlecruisers, while simultaneously allowing the fleet to addaircraft carriers up to a total displacement of 135,000 tons, in-cluding two at 33,000 tons each (actually 36,000 tons standardafter allowance for armor protection). On July 1, 1922, as adirect result, the Navy received approval to complete the twobattlecruiser hulls as aircraft carriers, and both ships enteredservice with the fleet in late 1927, USS Lexington as CV-2 andUSS Saratoga as CV-3. These ships were not only significantlylarger than Langley but more importantly, possessed the speedto maintain formation within the Battle Fleet.

By the time the Navy received authorization to build itsfourth carrier in late 1930, major progress had been achievedin air operations, deck handling, tactics, and dedicated aircraft.The design of CV-4, at less than half the displacement of CV-2 and -3, was heavily influenced by the desire to minimizeuse of tonnage available under the Washington Treaty for futurecarrier building programs while maximizing the size of its airgroup (i.e., 76 aircraft versus 80 on CV-2 and -3).

Moreover, recent advances in dive- bombing tactics andavailability of aircraft specialized for the role had led designers

to omit provision for torpedo- carrying aircraft, with the planof embarking an extra squadron of bomber- fighter types (BF).CV-4 entered service as USS Ranger on July 4, 1934; however,taking part in Fleet Problems from 1935 onwards showed thatthe weight- saving features of the design produced serious draw-backs in terms of speed and sea- keeping. In any event, by thetime design officials received approval in June 1933 to buildthe next two carriers, CV-5 and -6, BuShips had moved awayfrom the “minimal” carrier concept towards a 20,000 ton vesselaccommodating more powerful propulsion machinery and alarger aircraft complement (i.e., up to 96 aircraft). Thesecarriers also restored torpedo- carrying capability to the airgroup in anticipation of developing more modern torpedo- bomber aircraft types (TB).

In mid–1935, while CV-5 and -6 were at intermediatestages of construction, the Navy began moving forward withplans to build CV-7. The new carrier’s size, a displacement of14,700 tons, was dictated by the tonnage remaining under theWashington Treaty. Its overall design represented a compromisebetween the features of the CV-5 class and the need to reduceweight, resulting in an 8-percent reduction in length, less pow-erful propulsion machinery, and no antisubmarine armor belt.CV-7 was laid down in early 1936, and soon afterward, to allowfor the additional carrier tonnage, the Navy Department issueda directive for Langley to be removed from the fleet as a carrierand converted into a seaplane tender. With completion pro-ceeding on schedule, CV-5 joined the fleet on September 30,1937, as USS Yorktown, followed by CV-6 as USS Enterpriseon May 12, 1938. Although the size of the Navy’s carrier forcewould be restricted until 1942, when applicable treaties lapsed(i.e., the Washington Treaty plus the follow- on London NavalTreaty of 1936), the Naval Expansion Act of 1938 went aheadto allow a further 40,000 tons of new carrier construction, withfunds allocated to start the eighth carrier sometime in 1939.The Navy Department determined that CV-8, expected to enterservice around the time the treaty restrictions lapsed, would bea repeat Yorktown, whereas CV-9, as soon as funds were ap-propriated, would be built to a new design being formulated

PART III

Aviation- Related Ship Development

267

by BuShips. Ironically, in September 1939, the same month CV-8 was laid down, the start of war in Europe effectivelyended all shipbuilding limitations imposed by naval treaties.Meanwhile, the smaller CV-7, having already been completedto origi nal specifications, was commissioned as USS Wasp onApril 25, 1940.

By early 1940, BuShips had finalized design CV-9F as thepattern for the next carrier class: a 27,200 ton vessel, 62 feetlonger and 38 feet wider in beam than the Yorktowns. Then onJuly 19, 1940, mere weeks after CV-9 had been ordered, theNavy received its biggest shipbuilding boost since World WarI when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Two- oceanNaval Expansion Act into law. In fleet carriers alone, the Actauthorized construction of 18 new CV-9 class ships, with suf-ficient funding being allocated to place orders for eight of themthe following September, but this only served to foreshadowan even more massive carrier buildup that began in 1941. Outof an effort to get additional flightdecks into operation fasterthan the CV-9s could be built (i.e., 24 months+ per ship), theNavy Department began moving forward with plans to convertother ship hull types into an aircraft carrier configuration. Theidea of using a smaller type of carrier (i.e., less than 10,000tons) to replenish fleet carriers and transport aircraft had beenstudied previously but by 1940 such vessels were seen as po-tentially functioning in expanded roles such as convoy escort,antisubmarine patrol, support of amphibious operations, andcarrier pilot training. With this concept in mind, the Navy De-partment acquired a C3 cargo vessel in March 1941, which afterbeing modified for installation of a 345-foot flightdeck andhangar space below it, was commissioned just two months lateras USS Long Island, AVG-1 (auxiliary aircraft carrier; re- designated escort aircraft carrier [CVE] in mid–1943). Sea trialsafterward led to a 45-foot deck extension and relocation of thebridge. Another six merchant vessels were earmarked for a sim-ilar conversion in late 1941 and altogether, 119 more of theseships (i.e., CVE-2 through -120), variously referred to as “jeepcarriers” or “baby flattops,” would be completed before the endof 1945.

Even though escort carriers could be built quickly in largenumbers, their speed (16 knots) was limited by low- powerpropulsion systems, and they were completely unarmored. Afaster and better- protected type of carrier was still needed tofill the fleet carrier gap until the CV-9 class could begin reach -ing operational service. Thus, in August 1941, BuShips com-menced work on a scheme whereby Cleveland class (CL-55)cruiser hulls would be converted into 11,000 ton carriers.Though carrying a reduced air group (i.e., 30 aircraft), thecruiser propulsion system would enable the ship to keep pacewith a fast task group. The first such conversion joined the fleetin early 1943 as the USS Independence (CV-22), with eightmore examples reaching service before the end of the year. Allof these ships were later reclassified as light aircraft carriers(CVL). Five CV-9 class fleet carriers (CV-9, -10, -11, -16, and -17) had been laid down by the end of 1941, and the USS Essex,name ship of the class, was commissioned on December 31,

1942, and 17 of the 24 ultimately completed would be in serviceby the time hostilities ended in 1945. CV-8, last of the Yorktownclass, joined the fleet as USS Hornet on October 20, 1941, atwhich point the Navy possessed five large fleet carriers (CV-2,-3, -5, -6, and -8), two light fleet carriers (CV-4 and -7), andone auxiliary carrier (AVG-1), making it the third largest carrierforce in the world. Great Britain, with six large fleet carriers(three previously sunk 1939–1941), two light fleet carriers, andtwo escort carriers, was second, and Japan, with six fleet car-riers, three light carriers, and one training carrier, was first.

Langley CV-1 (AV-3)—1922


Type: Experimental and training aircraft carrier; seaplane tender(1937).

Builder: Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: 7,000-shp steam turbine with three boilers and a two- shaft

General Electric turbo- electric drive.Displacement: 12,700 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 534 ft. overall; beam 64 ft., draft 22 ft. (loaded)Defensive armament: Four 5-in. guns in open mounts.Performance: Top speed 14 knots; range 14,092 mi.Aircraft: Six holds accommodating up to 34 fully assembled aircraft.Crew complement: 350 including aviation personnel.

In July 1919 the U.S. Congress authorized the Navy De-partment to proceed with conversion of the coal collier Jupiter(commissioned AC-3 in 1913) into what would become the firstAmerican naval vessel capable of launching and recoveringwheeled aircraft at sea. No one at that time, including the mostpassionate advocates within Naval Aviation, could have appre-ciated the long- term ramifications of this move. Inasmuch asnaval officials were reluctant to devote funds to constructionof a new ship, the alteration of an existing auxiliary vessel wasseen as the fastest and most cost- effective means of getting anaircraft carrier into operation for purposes of experimentation,training, and tactical evaluation. Moreover, Jupiter possesseda minimal superstructure that would permit installation of analmost full- length, flush landing and takeoff deck, together witha hull of sufficient internal volume to allow stowage of aircraftbelow. The converted ship would not have hangars in the normalsense but store the aircraft in individual cargo holds and movethem to and from the flight deck through a large amidshipshatch via cranes mounted over the deck edges. In April 1920,while the conversion was underway, Jupiter was renamed Lan-gley (after aviation pioneer Samuel Pierpont Langley) and re-classified as CV-1 (carrier- heavier- than- air- one). As work pro-gressed, the bridge was left in its forward location, placing itbelow the wooden- planked flight deck, but the funnels (origi-nally one but a second added later) were repositioned on theport side and articulated to fold down 90 degrees for flight op-erations, thereby leaving the flight deck completely unob-structed. The initial arresting gear arrangement followed theearly British model, using a system of traverse wires, which,when engaged by the aircraft’s tailhook, checked its forward


motion, in conjunction with fore and aft wires (deleted in 1929),which guided it down the deck in a straight line. Two 60-footcatapults were also installed for launching floatplanes.

Langley was launched in August 1921 and commissionedas a naval ship on March 20, 1922, with Cdr. Kenneth Whitingin command. Flight operations began seven months later andon October 17, Lt. Virgil Griffin completed the first takeoff fromits deck in a Vought VE-7 (see under Scout and ObservationAircraft, above); then on October 22, an Aeromarine 39-B (seeunder Trainer, Transport, and Utility Aircraft, above) pilotedby Lt. Cdr. Geoffrey DeChevalier made the first arrestedlanding. In early 1923, the ship moved to NOB Norfolk, Vir -ginia, on the East Coast to continue experimental deck opera-tions with aircraft but returned to the West Coast later the sameyear in order to participate in the Navy’s first tactical fleet ex-ercises with an aircraft carrier. By mid–1927, as a result of theexperience gained in complex deck operations, combined withnoteworthy progress in carrier aircraft procurement, Langleycould put to sea with an Air Group consisting of 12 fighters, 10torpedo planes, and 12 scout and utility types. From the late

1920s onward, the ship remained on the West Coast, principallyoperating out of San Diego, where it continued to refine deckhandling procedures and equipment, provide carrier pilot train-ing, and contribute to tactical fleet problems; however, by mid–1936, with three fleet carriers in commission and three moreunder construction (per Washington Naval Treaty limitationson tonnage), the Navy Department decided to convert theslower and smaller Langley into a seaplane tender.

In early 1937, after the forward flight deck had been re-moved and a large seaplane- handling derrick installed forward,it returned to fleet service under the new classification AV-3.Soon after U.S. entry into World War II, Langley moved fromits permanent base in Cavite, Philippines to northern Australiawhere it was employed mainly to transport aircraft on its flightdeck area. On February 27, 1942, while en route from Tjilatjap,Java, after dropping off a cargo of 32 Army P-40s, Langley wasattacked by Japanese aircraft and mortally damaged by fivebomb hits. Once its crew abandoned ship, the derelict was sunkby escorting Allied destroyers to prevent it from falling intoenemy hands.

Part III: Aviation-Related Ship Development 269

USS Langley

The Langley during the summer of 1930 with full complement of 24 aircraft on deck: eight F6C-4s and eight F2B-1s of VF-2B plusone O2U-2 and seven O2U-4s of VS-1B.

Lexington Class CV-2 and -3—1927TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Fleet aircraft carrier.Builder: Fore River Ship & Engine Bldg. Co., Quincy, Massachusetts

(CV-2) and New York Shipbuilding Corp., Camden, New Jersey(CV-3).

Total built: 2 (USN)Machinery: 180,000-shp steam turbines with 16 boilers and a four-

shaft General Electricturbo- electric drive.Displacement: 36,000 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 888 ft. overall; beam 106 ft., draft 32 ft. 6 in.

(loaded)Defensive armament: Eight 8-in. guns in four paired turrets; in 1936,

added 24 (36 on CV-2) .50-cal. machine guns in flexible mounts,16 on side sponsons below flight deck and eight on main turretroofs (and 12 around a funnel platform on CV-2).

Performance: Top speed 33 knots; range 11,500 mi. at 15 knots.Aircraft: Hangar deck accommodating up to 80 (later 91) fully assem-

bled aircraft.Crew complement: 1,899 (later 2,122) including aviation personnel.

As a consequence of the limitations placed upon capitalships by the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, the Navy wasrequired to suspend construction of two 43,500 ton battle -cruisers laid down in 1920 and 1921, respectively, as CC-1 and-3. At the same time, however, the Treaty authorized signatoriesto build a fleet of aircraft carriers up to a combined displacedweight of 135,000 tons, which included two larger examplesdisplacing 36,000 tons standard each. Thus on July 1, 1923, onlyweeks after the Treaty had been formally approved by the U.S.Government, the two battlecruisers, with their displacementsreduced accordingly, were re- authorized as aircraft carriers,CV-2 and -3. As revised, the lines of their original battlecruiserhull plans remained virtually unchanged and most of the un-derwater armor belt was retained. A flight deck running the en-tire length of the ship was to be sited above the original maindeck line and incorporated directly into the hull structure, afeature not adopted on later carriers. The space between thenew flight deck and the old main deck was utilized to createan unobstructed 450 ft. ¥ 70 ft. ¥ 21 ft. aircraft hanger, togetherwith a 105-ft.-long maintenance bay and a 120-ft.-long hold forstoring disassembled aircraft. Two deck elevators (30 ft. ¥ 60ft. forward and 30 ft. ¥ 36 ft. aft) would serve to move aircraftbetween the hangar and the flight deck. As built, both shipscame with a traverse 150-foot catapult forward as well as cranesfor handling seaplanes. Unlike Langley, the flight deck sited

superstructures on the starboard side, amidships, consisting ofan “island” structure with bridge, navigation, and air operationcontrol decks, plus a large single funnel and four traversableturrets (two forward, two aft) each armed twin 8-inch guns, thelargest permitted by the Treaty.

Both ships were launched during 1925 and completed overthe next two years. On November 16, 1927, CV-3, christenedSaratoga, became the first commissioned as a naval ship, fol-lowed on December 14 by CV-2, christened Lexington. At thetime, they were the largest aircraft carriers in the world andwould retain the distinction until the appearance of Midway(CVBs) class carriers in the final months of World War II. Inlate January 1928, after a brief shakedown, Saratoga departedthe East Coast via the Panama Canal to join the Battle Fleet atSan Pedro (a deep bay adjacent to Long Beach, California thathad been used since 1914 as a naval anchorage for capital ships);Lexington remained at NOB Norfolk until early April, when italso left for San Pedro. By the end of the summer, the two newcarriers were each operating an air group of 56 to 60 aircraftorganized into a fighter squadron, a bombing squadron, a scout-ing squadron (still awaiting aircraft), a torpedo squadron, anda utility unit, namely: VF-1B, VB-2B, VS-2B, and VT-2B onSaratoga and VF-3B, VB-1B, VS-3B, and VT-1B on Lexington.(Note, the “B” suffix after the squadron number indicated as-signment to the Battle Fleet.) The balance of 1928 was devotedto training the carriers’ respective air groups, maintenance anddeck crews, and ships’ companies in preparation for full- scaleoperations.

In January 1929, Lexington and Saratoga, in company withLangley, left San Pedro to participate in Fleet Problem IX, thefirst involving a task force which included aircraft carriers fastenough to keep pace with the Battle Fleet. In the fleet problemsthat followed, the two big carriers were typically assigned toopposing forces, and early difficulties in identification led to abroad black stripe being painted on Saratoga’s funnel. Signifi-cantly, while not displacing the Battle Line (i.e., battleshipsgrouped by divisions), the new carriers nevertheless assumeda position within the main body of the task force where theiraircraft could be used to expand the fleet’s offensive strikingpower. In Fleet Problem X, conducted in the Caribbean during1930, Saratoga and Langley were both “disabled” when Lex-ington launched a surprise attack, plainly demonstrating thespeed with which air power could change the tactical balancein a naval engagement. The problems also showed the potency


USS Saratoga


Top: Lexington seen in spring of 1928 during shakedown prior to taking aboard her aircraft complement. Lexington and sister shipSaratoga were the largest aircraft carriers in the world at the start of World War II. Bottom: Saratoga in 1936 with 61 aircraft ondeck: one command SU-4, 15 SBU-1s of VS-2, 15 F3F-1s of VF-6, 15 BFC-2s of VB-2, and 15 TG-2s of VT-2.

of ship- based air power (as compared to traditional naval bom-bardment) against land- based objectives. Ironically, in early1938 while Fleet Problem XIX was being conducted off theHawaiian Islands, Saratoga launched a successful surprise airattack on Pearl Harbor that was copied to a large degree by theJapanese in December 1941. Later still, similar mock attackswere carried out against Mare Island Naval Shipyard and NASAlameda in the San Francisco Bay area.

Heavy (.50-caliber) machine gun positions, intendedchiefly for antiaircraft defense, were added in 1936 (24 onSaratoga and 36 on Lexington). In the spring of 1940, the twobig carriers participated in Fleet Problem XXI, the last heldprior to U.S. entry into World War II. The same year, BuShipsdetermined that the 8-inch gun turrets would be replaced with5-inch/38-caliber dual- purpose guns which could be usedagainst either surface or aerial targets. Practical experiencegained in the fleet problems had shown that the 8-inch gunscould not be fired cross- deck, and they were useless againstaircraft. The armament refit, scheduled for 1942, also con -templated a significant upgrade in antiaircraft defenses with1.1-inch (28-mm) “pom- poms” in quad mounts. Both ships un-derwent extensive overhauls in 1941 during which their flightdecks were widened forward and a CAMX-1 search radar in-stalled.

At the time the Japanese struck Pearl Harbor on Decem-ber 7, 1941, it was fortunate that Lexington was at sea deliveringaircraft to the Marines at Midway Island (i.e., VMF-211) whileSaratoga, having just completed its overhaul, was berthed inSan Diego. In the weeks immediately following the attack, bothcarriers took up offensive patrols off Hawaiian waters, includinga plan to reinforce the Marines at Wake Island that was recalledon December 22. In January 1942, after sustaining damage froma torpedo fired by a Japanese submarine, Saratoga entered thePuget Sound Naval Shipyard for repairs that included the pre-viously scheduled armament refit. Following several skirmisheswith the Japanese off New Guinea and Rabaul in the southwestPacific, Lexington docked at Pearl Harbor in March to receivea hasty armament refit which entailed removal of its 8-inch tur-rets in exchange for 1.1-inch antiaircraft guns in quad mounts.In mid–April, Lexington sortied from Pearl Harbor en route tothe Coral Sea (between the Solomon Islands and NortheastAustralia), joining up on May 1 with Yorktown (CV-5) and TaskForce 17. On May 8, 1942, after launching a strike against theopposing Japanese force, Lexington was attacked by aircraft

from the enemy carriers Shokaku and Zaikaku during which itsuffered hits from two torpedoes and three bombs, plus furtherdamage to the hull from near misses. Several hours after theattack, an explosion of the aviation fuel bunkers rapidly spreadfires beyond control, forcing Capt. Frederick Sherman to even-tually order an “abandon ship.” To foreclose any later attemptat enemy salvage, Lexington was deliberately sunk by two tor-pedoes from the Navy destroyer Phelps.

Saratoga was unable to resume combat operations in timeto participate in the early carrier battles at Coral Sea and Mid-way, however, it did open the assault on Guadalcanal in August1942 and continued in support of Allied combat operations inthe southwest and central Pacific areas until coming to MareIsland in late 1943 for a long- overdue overhaul and refit. Re-turning to combat duty during early 1944, Saratoga operatedwith the British Fleet in the Indian Ocean until June, then spentthe balance of the year training carrier pilots out of NAS Bre-merton, Washington. In February 1945, the ship joined up withother naval units off Iwo Jima, where it subsequently incurredserious damage from bomb hits and kamikaze strikes whileproviding air cover to American invasion forces. Following an-other round of repairs at Puget Sound, Saratoga arrived at PearlHarbor in May 1945 to serve as a training carrier. In the intervalfollowing Japanese surrender in September, the ship was usedto transport military personnel from the Pacific Theater to theU.S., bringing a total of 29,204 war veterans home, more thanany other naval vessel. In early 1946, in the midst of the massivepostwar demobilization, Saratoga was decommissioned anddeclared surplus. Having survived over four years of combat,the old carrier—as a stationary target—finally met its end onJuly 25, 1946 when it was destroyed and sunk during the atomicbomb tests being conducted near Bikini Atoll.

Ranger CV-4—1934


Type: Fleet aircraft carrier.Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding & Drydock Co., Newport News,

Virginia.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: Two 53,500-shp steam turbines with 6 boilers and a

geared, two- shaft drive.Displacement: 14,000 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 769 ft. overall; beam 109 ft. 5 in.; draft 22 ft. 6

in. (loaded)


USS Ranger

Defensive armament: Four (later increased to eight and moved to spon-sons) 5-in./25-cal. dual- purpose guns in open deck- edge mountson both sides fore and aft.

Performance: Top speed 29.3 knots; range 11,500 mi. at 15 knots.Aircraft: Hangar deck accommodating up to 76 (later 86) fully assem-

bled aircraft.Crew complement: 1,788 (later 2,148) including aviation personnel.

The Ranger, laid down in September 1931 as CV-4, holdsthe honor of having been the first Navy ship to be built fromthe keel up as an aircraft carrier. Its lines and layout bore moreresemblance to the general configuration of Langley than thatof the considerably larger Lexington class. The smaller size ofthe design was dictated by a desire to reserve the tonnage re-maining under the Washington Treaty to future carrier buildingprograms (i.e., the Yorktown class was already in the early plan-ning stages). The flight deck emerged as a separate structureabove the main deck, supported by a light girder latticework,and the space directly below it was utilized for hangars, work-shops, and stowage. As originally laid down, CV-4 was to havehad an unobstructed flight deck like Langley’s; however, priorto the ship being launched in early 1933, the addition of a smallisland superstructure on the starboard side, amidships, wasdeemed necessary for command and control. The six funnels,three per side that could be hinged- down 90 degrees for flightoperations, were located as far aft as possible for a stern dis-charge of gases. Hydraulic deck elevators, one sited amidshipsand one forward of the island, would facilitate movement of

aircraft between decks. One of the new carrier’s most conspic-uous features was lack of provision for torpedo stowage: CV-4’s air group was to consist of a fighter squadron, a scoutingsquadron, two bombing squadrons, and a utility unit. Consid-erable progress made since 1927 both in refining dive- bombingtactics and procuring new dive- bomber aircraft (see MartinBM, Great Lakes BG, and Curtiss BFC/BF2C) had influencednaval planners to exclude torpedo planes from the aircraft com-plement. In order to keep weight to a minimum, the ship wasunarmored and limited to a defensive armament of only four5-inch/25-caliber dual- purpose guns in port and starboard deck- edge mounts, forward and aft. As a result of its size and the se-rious design emphasis on weight- saving, CV-4 materialized ata mere 180 tons displaced per aircraft carried, compared to 450tons for the Lexington class.

On July 4, 1934, CV-4 was commissioned USS Rangerwith Capt. Arthur Bristol in command. Initial flight operationsbegan in early August, and following a two- month shakedowncruise to South America, the ship engaged in operational train-ing out of NOB Norfolk until March 1935, when it transitedthe Panama Canal en route to join the Battle Fleet on the WestCoast. The fleet anchorage, by this time, had moved from SanPedro to Pearl Harbor, so that over the next four years, Rangerparticipated in various fleet problems between the Californiacoast and the Hawaiian Islands. The design characteristics thatgave the new carrier such an efficient aircraft to displacementratio proved to be shortcomings in operational practice: the


Ranger was the first Navy ship built from the keel up as an aircraft carrier. This photograph, probably from 1935 or 1936, shows anair group on deck of BM-1s and -2s, SBU-1s, F2F-1s, F3F-1s, and O3U-1s.

slower top speed (5 knots less than CV-2 and -3) limited itsability to maneuver with the Battle Fleet and poor sea- keeping(rolling and pitching) restricted flight operations to relativelycalm conditions. Ranger returned to the East Coast in early1939 and in September, soon after the war broke out in Europe,commenced neutrality patrols along the middle Atlanticbetween Bermuda, Newfoundland, and the eastern U.S. coast.

Following the Japanese attack on Pear Harbor in December1941, the ship patrolled the south Atlantic until March 1942,when it entered Norfolk Navy Yard to receive installation ofCAMX-1 radar and 16 1.1-inch AA guns in quad mounts forwardand aft of the island. Even with the refit, naval officialdom be-lieved Ranger to be too slow and too lightly protected forPacific combat operations.

After leaving the yard, Ranger was employed primarily totransport USAAF and Lend- Lease aircraft to West Africa,where they could be ferried to various Allied combatcommands. Then in November 1942, leading the naval taskforce (including four CVEs) that supported Operation Torch,the carrier conducted air strikes against Vichy French targetsin Morocco and provided air cover to invading Allied forces.After a stateside overhaul in early 1943, the ship served againas an aircraft transport until August, when it was attached tothe British Home Fleet and used to launch air attacks onGerman shipping in the North Sea. Ranger returned to the U.S.later that year and in January 1944, became a training carrierout of NAS Quonset Point, Rhode Island, though it wasdetached on one occasion to transport USAAF aircraft to theMediterranean Theater. During the early part of the war, Bu-Ships had planned to subject Ranger to an extensive refit andmodernization which would have involved lengthening the hull,replacing the flight deck, adding armor plate in vital locations,and installing new propulsion machinery; however, the planwas cancelled in favor of a more modest refit during the springof 1944 that included strengthening the flight deck, installationof more powerful catapults, plus a radar upgrade. In August1944 the carrier transferred to the West Coast to support trainingoperations out of Pearl Harbor and San Diego, remaining thereuntil the war’s end. After returning to the East Coast andserving briefly at NAS Pensacola, Ranger was decommissionedin October 1946 and thereafter sold for scrap.

Yorktown Class CV-5, -6, and -8—1937TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Fleet aircraft carrier.Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding & Drydock Co., Newport News,

Virginia.Total built: 3 (USN)Machinery: Four 120,000-shp steam turbines with 9 boilers and a

geared, four- shaft drive.Displacement: 20,190 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 809 ft. 6 in. overall; beam 109 ft. 6 in. [114 ft. on

CV-8]; draft 25 ft. 11 in. (loaded).Defensive armament: Eight 5-in./38-cal. dual- purpose guns and 24

.50-cal. machine guns in open deck- edge mounts on both sidesfore and aft (and on CV-8, 16 1.1-inch “pom- poms” in quadmounts forward and aft of the island, retrofitted to CV-6 and -6in 1941–1942) .

Performance: Top speed 32.5 knots; range 14,375 mi. at 15 knots.Aircraft: Hangar deck accommodating up to 96 fully assembled air-

craft.Crew complement: 1,890 (later 2,217) including aviation personnel.

As a direct result of passage of the National Recovery Actin June 1933, the Navy received authorization in August to pro-ceed with plans to build two new aircraft carriers, CV-5 and -6. Even before Ranger was launched, naval design officials hadmoved away from the “minimal” carrier concept in favor of a20,000 ton vessel that would accommodate more powerfulpropulsion machinery and a larger aircraft complement. Still,as their final designs emerged, CV-5 and -6 had far more incommon with Ranger than the larger Lexington class: a lightlybuilt flight deck above the main deck, with hangars, workshops,and storage areas appearing as a light superstructure rather thanbeing integral to the hull. Although a Langley- type flush deckhad been considered at first, the design ultimately included asubstantial island superstructure on the starboard side thathoused bridge, navigation, and air operations decks as well asthree fixed funnels. A third deck elevator was positioned nearthe stern in addition to those at the bow and aft of the island.Besides the two hydraulic catapults located on the forward flightdeck, a third catapult firing athwartships was installed in theforward hangar deck to permit launches during deck operations.The new carriers’ planned air groups would each consist of 18fighters, 37 scout /dive- bombers, 36 torpedobombers, and fiveutility types. In the interval since construction of Ranger,BuAer had awarded development contracts to Douglas andGreat Lakes under a new torpedo- bomber (TB) requirement,and prototypes (i.e., XTBD-1 and XTBG-1) were scheduled tobegin evaluations in early 1935. Defensive armament comprisedeight of the newly developed 8-inch/38-caliber dual- purpose


USS Yorktown

guns in open deck- edge mounts, forward and aft on both sides,plus 24 50-caliber machine guns in flexible mounts. Althoughthe flight deck was unarmored, the design did allow for a 21⁄2-inch to 4-inch waterline belt against torpedoes and armoreddecking over the propulsion machinery and magazines.

Both ships were laid down in early 1934 and launched dur-ing 1936. CV-5, christened Yorktown, was commissioned onSeptember 30, 1937, followed by CV-6, Enterprise, on May 12,1938. The new carriers remained on the East Coast to train theirnew air groups and complete Caribbean cruises until the springof 1939, when they transited the Panama Canal to join thePacific Battle Fleet. Although their air groups were compara-tively inexperienced, Yorktown and Enterprise made importantcontributions to the overall progress made in development ofcarrier tactics during Fleet Problems XX (1939) and XXI (1940).In early 1941, as the U.S. moved closer to a wartime footing,Enterprise was permanently based at Pearl Harbor while York-town returned to NOB Norfolk as part of the Atlantic Fleet.

After the Washington Treaty’s limits on warship tonnagewere removed by the follow- on London Treaty of 1936, CV-8,the third carrier of the Yorktown class, was authorized in early1937 and laid down in September 1939. Although the design

for a substantially larger class (i.e., Essex) was in the earlystages of formulation, naval planners decided that another York-town could be built and placed in service much faster. CV-8,differing in details from its sister ships, featured a flight deckwidened by five feet, plus four batteries of quadruple- mounted1.1-inch antiaircraft guns and 24 single- mounted .50-calbre ma-chine guns. The new carrier was launched from Newport Newsin December 1940 and placed in commission as USS Horneton October 20, 1941 and immediately afterward, operated outof NOB Norfolk to train its newly formed air group and com-plete fitting out. Yorktown and Enterprise were equipped withnew CXAM-1 radar systems during 1941 and Hornet in early1942.

In a fortuitous twist of fate, Enterprise and Lexington lefttheir berths at Pearl Harbor on December 2, 1941 on a missionto deliver aircraft, personnel (i.e., VMF-211), and military pro-visions to Wake Island and were still en route back to Hawaiifive days later at the time the Japanese struck. The ensuingsearch for the Japanese carrier force on December 8 and 9proved to be fruitless, however, an SBD-2 of VS-6 from En-terprise did score the first American victory over the Japanesefleet when it attacked and sank submarine I-70 on December


A 1940 photograph showing Yorktown with 96 aircraft on deck. Note 16 JRFs parked athwartships, six JRS-1s sans wings, and twoJRFs. The air group consisted of F3F-3s, SBC-3s, BT-1s, SB2U-1s, and TBD-1s.

10. Meanwhile, Yorktown departed Norfolk for the Pacific onDecember 16 while Hornet remained behind. During the earliestmonths of 1942, Yorktown and Enterprise, formed into two sep-arate task forces, initiated the first American offensive opera-tions of the war, carrying out attacks on Japanese shipping andshore bases in the Central and Southwest Pacific. On April 18,1942, after arriving at NAS Alameda the previous month,Hornet launched 16 USAAF B-25s led by Lt. Col. James H.Doolittle in the first American military attack against Tokyoand five other cities on the Japanese mainland (for a more de-tailed explanation, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Doolittle_Raid#The_Raid).

On May 8, 1942, with Lexington as part of Task Force 17,Yorktown fought the first major carrier engagement of the warat the Battle of the Coral Sea. Even though the exchangeresulted in the loss of Lexington and serious damage to York-town, the corresponding harm inflicted on enemy carriersShokaku and Zaikaku and consequent loss of aircraft was suf-ficient to stall the Japanese advance into the Southwest Pacificand give U.S. forces time to regroup. Between June 6 and 7,1942, in what is generally regarded as the most important navalbattle of World War II, Enterprise and Hornet (Task Force 16),along with the hastily repaired Yorktown (Task Force 17), en-gaged and sank four Japanese carriers in the vicinity of MidwayIsland. Following two waves of enemy air attacks, Yorktownhad to be abandoned, and while under tow two days later, sankafter being torpedoed by a Japanese submarine. During a thirdcarrier engagement, fought off the Santa Cruz Islands(northeast of the Solomons) between October 26 and 27, 1942,

Hornet was sunk and Enterprise damaged. Though technicallya Japanese tactical victory, the extensive repairs required fortwo of the three IJN carriers involved, combined with largelosses of experienced aircrews killed (148 IJN vs. 26 USN)proved to be an irreversible setback to Japanese forces in theSouthwest Pacific. Enterprise, surviving the war as the Navy’smost highly decorated ship, was decommissioned in 1947 andplaced in reserve, then following an unsuccessful effort to pre-serve the ship as a memorial, sold for scrap in 1958.

Wasp CV-7—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Fleet aircraft carrier.Builder: Fore River Ship & Engine Bldg. Co., Quincy, Massachusetts.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: Two 70,000-shp steam turbines with 6 boilers and a

geared, two- shaft drive.Displacement: 14,700 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 741 ft. 3 in. overall; beam 109 ft.; draft 24 ft. 6

in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Eight 5-in./38-cal. dual- purpose guns in open

deck- edge mounts on both sides fore and aft; 16 1.1-inch guns infour quad mounts for and aft of the island; and 24 .50-cal.machine guns in deck- edge mounts on both sides.

Performance: Top speed 29.5 knots; range 12,000 mi. at 15 knots.Aircraft: Hangar deck accommodating up to 76 fully assembled air-

craft.Crew complement: 1,889 including aviation personnel.

Laid down in April 1936, CV-7 emerged as a direct byprod-uct of the tonnage remaining to the U.S. Navy (i.e., 15,000 tons)


The Enterprise is seen in 1940 with an air group consisting of 17 F3F-2s, 17 BT-1s, 18 SBC-3s, 18 TBD-1s, six SUs, one SOC-3, oneJ2F-1 and one SBC-4 command aircraft. It was the most decorated Navy ship of World War II.

for carrier construction under the Washington Treaty. Overall,its design represented a compromise between displaced weightand the size of the air group to be carried (i.e., 193 tonsdisplaced per aircraft compared to 210 for the CV-5 class).Though having many features in common with the Yorktowns,efforts to limit CV-7’s weight resulted in a 132-foot decreasein length, reduced- power propulsion machinery, and no anti-submarine armor belt. Its smaller flight deck allowed space foronly two elevators, but a moveable deck- edge girder could berigged to lift aircraft, and to enhance off- deck takeoff capability,provision was made for two hangar- deck catapults firingathwartships. The ship was launched in April 1939 and com-missioned USS Wasp on April 25, 1940, with Capt. John W.Reeves, Jr., in command.

Upon completion of fitting out, Wasp commenced qualifi-cations of its four air group squadrons, two fighter and twoscouting (VF-71, VF-72, VS-71, and VS-72). Like Ranger, it

had been designed with no provision for torpedo stowage, al-though a torpedo- bomber complement was in fact added later.Finishing its shakedown in the fall of 1940, Wasp was perma-nently assigned to the Atlantic Fleet at NOB Norfolk, and inMarch 1941, entered the Norfolk Navy Yard to receive installa-tion of a CAMX-1 radar system, steel splinter shielding aroundall 1.1-inch and .50-caliber AA batteries, and repairs to the tur-bines. It subsequently participated in the American occupationof Iceland in August 1941 and while offshore, became the firstcarrier to launch USAAF aircraft when 30 P-40s and 3 PT-17sleft its deck to form the island’s initial air defense. During thefirst months of 1942, after the U.S. declared war, Wasp operatedin British waters in support of the Royal Navy Home Fleet,then in April and May, sortied into the Mediterranean to assistin the relief of Malta, making two trips to transport approxi-mately 100 RAF Spitfire fighters to the besieged island base.

After returning to Norfolk for a hasty refit, Wasp embarked


USS Wasp

The Wasp seen in the Atlantic in early months of 1942, after application of camouflage. Aircraft spotted on rear deck are SB2U-2sof VS-71, still in prewar colors. The carrier moved to the Pacific in the summer of 1942.

for the South Pacific in early June 1942, stopping over in SanDiego to exchange its Vought SB2Us for Douglas SBDs (VS-71 and -72) and take on Grumman TBFs for its new torpedosquadron. Once on station, Wasp joined forces with Saratogaand Enterprise in defense of the eastern Solomon Islands andthe invasion of Guadalcanal. On September 15, 1942, while es-corting troop transports bound for Guadalcanal, the carrier wasmortally damaged by three torpedo hits from Japanese subma-rine I-19. After being abandoned, the ship’s demise was has -tened by torpedoes fired by American destroyer Landsdowne.

Long Island AVG-1 (CVE-1)—1941TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Auxiliary (later escort) aircraft carrier.Builder: Sun Shipbuilding & Drydock Co., Chester, Pennsylvania.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: One 8,500-bhp Sulzer 7-cyliner diesel engine driving a

single shaft.

Displacement: 7,886 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 492 ft. overall; beam 78 ft.; draft 25 ft. 6 in.

(loaded)Defensive armament: One 4-in./51-cal. gun aft, two 3-in./50-cal. guns

forward, and four 50-cal. machine guns (location not reported).Performance: Top speed 16 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: Hangar deck accommodating up to 21 fully assembled air-

craft.Crew complement: 970 including aviation personnel.

Popularly known as “jeep carriers” or “baby flattops,”AVG-1 (CVE-1) became the progenitor of 122 escort carriersbuilt in six classes between 1941 and 1945, 84 ultimately servingwith the U.S. Navy and 38 lend- leased to Britain. As far backas the early 1930s, naval planners had shown interest in the ideaof a small carrier (i.e., less than 10,000 tons) that could functionprimarily as an auxiliary aircraft transport, either to replenishfleet carriers or move Army aircraft to overseas bases. However,there was little impetus to develop the concept until late 1939,when the U.S. found itself confronted with the outbreak of war


Long Island

The first of 84 escort carriers that would be completed by 1945, Long Island is seen underway in July 1941 with two F2A-3s of VS-201 spotted forward. The flight deck was extended 75 feet in late 1941.

in Europe plus increasing concerns over Japanese designs inthe Pacific. By this time, in addition to a transport role, smallertypes of carriers were also seen as potentially filling the gap inconvoy escort, antisubmarine patrol, air support of amphibiousoperations, and carrier qualification training for new pilots.More importantly, the new ships could be produced very quicklyand inexpensively by adapting a flight deck and associatedhangar superstructure to an existing merchant vessel hull.

Definite plans were made in early 1941 when the Navy ac-quired a number of merchant ships to undergo conversion intoa carrier configuration. The first example, the former C3 cargovessel Mormacmail, designated AVG-1 (auxiliary aircraft car-rier), was commissioned USS Long Island on June 2, 1941. Asbuilt, the ship appeared with a flight deck running 70 percentof its length (345 feet), a navigating bridge located forward ofthe deck edge, and no island structure. (The ex–Mormacland,second ship of the same class, was delivered to the Royal Navyand commissioned in November 1941 as HMS Archer [D78]).Following several months of operational evaluations, Long Is-land left NOB Norfolk and entered the Mare Island shipyardin Vallejo, California to receive modifications that includedlengthening the flight deck to 420 feet and relocating the bridgeto sponsons on the port and starboard sides.

In early 1942, soon after the U.S. entered the war, Long Is-land escorted a convoy to Newfoundland and returned to NOBNorfolk for pilot training duties. The ship moved to the WestCoast in the spring of 1942, then in June, embarked two Marinesquadrons at Pearl Harbor and departed for the South Pacific.After leaving Fiji on August 13, it launched the first Marine air-craft to arrive at Henderson Field in defense of Guadalcanal.

From the fall of 1942 to the end of 1943, Long Island (re- designated twice, ACV-1 in August 1942, CVE-1 in July 1943)returned to the West Coast and resumed training duties, andfrom 1944 through the war’s end, transported aircraft and per-sonnel to various combat staging areas in the Pacific Theater.After being decommissioned and sold in 1946, the ship revertedto a merchant configuration and remained active until 1966.

Note on CV-9 Class Fleet Carriers. When the Treaty re-strictions on carrier tonnage were lifted in 1936, Navy officialsbegan design work on an improved class of fleet carrier tofollow the Yorktowns into service. New requirements included(1) a 10 percent increase in aircraft complement; (2) a length -ened and widened flight deck to facilitate a faster pace ofaircraft takeoff, refueling, rearming, and landing operations;(3) a 25 percent increase in aircraft spares to sustain prolongedcombat operations; (4) improved armor protection againstbombs and torpedoes; and (5) increased antiaircraft defenses.As finalized in early 1940, design CV-9F emerged as a 27,200ton ship having a length of 872 feet overall and a beam of 147feet 6 inches, with 150,000-shp of propulsion machinery drivingfour shafts. Three ships of the new class had been laid downbefore the end of 1941, and the first was commissioned as theUSS Essex on December 31, 1942. From 1943 onwards, Essexclass carriers formed the backbone of Navy offensiveoperations in the Pacific, a total of 22 having been placed incommission by the war’s end. Six more were completed afterthe war, and the last active example of the class (i.e., CV-16,the second Lexington) was used for training until 1991.

Note on CV-22 Class Light Carriers. In 1941, as it be -came readily apparent that it would take a period of years for


Basic Outline and Dimensions of USS Essex

Final arrangement of CV-9 as laid down in 1941.

Basic Outline and Dimenions of USS Independence

Final arrangement of CV-22 as laid down in 1942.

sizable numbers of CV-9 class fleet carriers to reach combatservice, the government instituted an emergency program toconvert a number of previously laid down Cleveland (CL-55)class light cruiser hulls into a carrier configuration. Leavingthe original cruiser propulsion ma chinery and armor protectionessentially unchanged would result in a smaller but well- protected carrier, fast enough to keep up with the main bodyof the fleet and large enough to support an air group of 30 air-craft comprised into three squadrons (one VF, VB, and VT).The CV-22 class emerged at about half the mass of the York-towns, displacing 10,833 tons standard, with a small islandstructure and four stacks offset to the starboard side in orderto leave the narrow flight deck (78 feet wide) unobstructed.The first example converted (laid down as CL-59) was launchedin August 1942 and commissioned USS Independence on Jan-uary 14, 1943, and by the end of the year, had been joined byeight more carriers of the same class. In mid–1943, as moreEssex class carrier entered service, the Independence class were re- designated as “light” carriers (CVL).

SEAPLANE AND AIRSHIP TENDERS

Synopsis of Seaplane and AirshipTender Procurement

Navy vessels specifically designed to support seaplane op-erations did not appear until just prior to World War II. Giventhe fact that the naval demobilization following World War Ihad generated a multitude of surplus warships and auxiliaries,it was seen as far more practical to refit existing vessels for avi-ation duties than build new ones. Although several obsoletewarships had been used in connection with seaplane experi-ments and training from 1914 to 1917, there were no dedicatedships on record as serving at the time of the armistice in late1918. Three ships underwent conversions for the seaplane sup-port role during 1919: USS Arroostook (CM-3) and USS Shaw-mut (CM-4), both 3,800 ton ex–passenger steamers that hadbeen requisitioned during the war and reconfigured as minelay-ers; and USS Sandpiper (AM-51), a new 1,350 ton Lapwingclass minesweeper commissioned directly into service with theaviation branch. One destroyer, USS Harding (DD-91), actedas a plane guard in 1919 for the transatlantic flight of the CurtissNC boats, then after minimal modifications, served from 1920to 1922 as a support ship in the seaplane training program atNAS Pensacola.

While still under construction, a 11,500 ton fleet auxiliarywas initially finished out as an airship and balloon tender, en-tering service in late 1921 as the USS Wright (AZ-1), but afterbeing reequipped for seaplane operations in 1925, was reclas-sified as AV-1, the first Navy ship to receive the seaplane tenderdesignation. A 16,800 ton fleet oiler, USS Patoka (AO-9), be-

came the primary support vessel for the Navy’s rigid airshipprogram in 1924 after being fitted with a mooring mast and air-ship repair and storage facilities. Two more Lapwingminesweepers were reassigned to seaplane duties, USS Pelican(AM-27) in 1922 and USS Heron (AM-10) in 1924. USS Jason(AC-12), a 19,550 ton coal collier, began supporting AsiaticFleet seaplane operations in 1925 and though unmodified, was re- designated AV-2 in 1930. As the patrol and floatplane forcegrew, four Lapwings were added to the aviation branch in 1931,Avocet (AM-19), Teal (AM-23), Swan (AM-34), and Gannett(AM-41); another in 1932, Lapwing (AM-1); and the last in 1935,Thrush (AM-18). These small vessels had been carried on thenaval inventory as “minesweeper for duty with aircraft” butwere reclassified in 1936 as small seaplane tenders in hull num-ber order (i.e., AVP-1 through -9).

The aircraft carrier Langley (CV-1), after undergoing con-version into a seaplane tender, rejoined the fleet in 1937 as AV-3. With Naval Aviation extending its patrol reach duringthe mid– and late 1930s (e.g., 409 Consolidated PBYs deliveredor ordered by the end of 1939), with particular emphasis onmore widespread Pacific operations, it became obvious that anew type of purpose- built heavy seaplane tender would beneeded to provide maintenance and logistical support, as wellas command and control of VP units. To this end, the Navy re-ceived congressional approval in 1937 for construction of the8,671 ton AV-4, then a year later, the Naval Expansion Act of1938 appropriated additional funds to build sistership AV-5.The Act likewise authorized the first two ships in a planned se-ries of small seaplane tenders (less than 2,500 tons) that wouldover time replace the Lapwings. These new AVPs would bespecifically designed to support seaplane operations in forwardcombat areas and have the additional capability, in terms ofspeed and armament, to act as an escort for heavy tenders andauxiliaries. Construction of AV-4 began in March 1938; AV-5and the first two small tenders, AVP-10 and -11, were all sched-uled to be laid down in 1939.

But even as the shipbuilding efforts moved forward, it be-came apparent to naval planners that new patrol aircraft wouldbe deployed for ocean operations at rate much faster than theseships could reach service. As an interim solution, the Navy De-partment initiated a program in early 1938 to convert a numberof World War I–era Clemson class destroyers into smallseaplane tenders and in June 1938, USS Childs (DD-241)entered the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard as first to undergo theconversion. Ultimately, 14 of these destroyers were selected forconversion: two entered service in early 1939, ex–DD-241 and-244; and twelve by the end of 1940, ex–DD-196, -186, -188, -342, -344, -251, -255, -267, -270, -260, -266, and -237. Thecon verted destroyers had initially been classified as AVPs, how-ever, in mid–1940, all were re- designated “aviation tender de-stroyer” (AVD-1 through -14). The massive growth of the patrolaircraft fleet portended by the Two- Ocean Naval Expansion Actof 1940 made it apparent that greater numbers of heavy seaplanetenders would needed in service faster than the AV-4 class couldbe built. Thus, in mid–1940, the Navy Department acquired


two incomplete C3-type merchant vessels to be set aside forconversion into a heavy seaplane tender configuration. Onschedule, AV-4 joined the fleet on November 15, 1940, as USSCurtiss, followed by AV-5 on December 20 as USS Abermarle.

Construction of the first two purpose- built small seaplanetenders commenced in late 1939, and both ships were commis-sioned the same day on July 3, 1941, USS Barnegat (AVP-10)and Biscayne (AVP-11), with three more reaching service beforethe end of 1941: Casco (AVP-12), Humbolt (AVP-21), Mata -gorda (AVP-22). (Note, hull numbers 14 through 20 had pre-viously been assigned to the Childs class.) The two heavy sea-plane tender C3 conversions also joined the fleet in mid–1941,USS Tangier as AV-8 and Pocomoke as AV-9. (Note, hull num-ber AV-6 had provisionally been assigned to Patoka [AO-9] in1939 and AV-7 reserved for a repeat Curtiss). As of December1941, the Navy’s fleet comprised a total of 34 ships dedicatedto seaplane operations, consisting of six heavy tenders (AV-1,-3, -4, -5, -8, and -9) and 28 small tenders (AVP-1 through -9,AVD-1 through -14, and AVP-10, -11, -12, -21, and -22). Throughthe course of World War II, 30 more Barnegat class and fivemore Tangier class tenders were placed in commission. Therepeat Curtiss, after a partial redesign, became the Curritukclass, with four ships (AV-10 through -13) reaching service bythe end of 1945.

Aroostook Class CM-3 and -4—1919


Type: Ex–passenger steamer modified as a minelayer and seaplanetender.

Builder: Cramp & Sons Shipyard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Total built: 2 (USN)Machinery: two 7,000-shp vertical triple expansion steam engines

with eight boilers and a geared, two- shaft drive.Displacement: 3,800 tons standard (approx.).Dimensions: Length 395 ft. overall; beam 52 ft. 2 in. ft.; draft 16 ft.

(loaded)Defensive armament: One 5-in./51-cal. and two 3-in./50-cal. guns in

open mounts, two flexible .30-cal. machine guns, and provisionfor 300 mines.

Performance: Top speed 20 knots; range 5,000 mi.Aircraft: One flying boat or up to 6 floatplanes embarked for repairs.Crew complement: 200

Aroostook and sistership (very similar but marginallysmaller) Shawmut were possibly the first Navy ships to be mod-ified specifically for the seaplane support role. Built in 1907 ascoastal passenger steamers, both were acquired in 1917 and con-verted as minelayers under designations ID# 1256 (Aroostook)and 1255 (Shawmut). In early 1919, Aroostook became the firstexample refitted for aviation duties, followed later the sameyear by Shawmut. Modifications included removing mine rails


Seaplane tender Aroostook seen in mid–1920s with one PN-type flying boat on deck aft and another in the water visible beyond theno. 2 funnel. The ship was decommissioned in 1931.

to create deck space, fitting aircraft hoisting booms, and addingnew facilities for aircraft repair and servicing. Apparently be-cause they retained much of their original minelaying equip-ment, the two ships received mine- carrier designations, CM-3and -4, respectively, and in 1928, Shawmut was re- namedOglala to avoid confusion with another Navy ship.

Aroostook played a major role in the transatlantic flight ofthe Curtiss NC boats (see page 141) during the spring of 1919,initially taking station in Trepassy Bay, Newfoundland as abase, and later met the NC-4 in England where the aircraft wasdismantled, taken onboard, and ultimately returned to the U.S.Throughout the 1920s, Aroostook and Shawmut (Oglala) prin-cipally supported seaplane operations on the West Coast butoccasionally took part in Caribbean fleet maneuvers. Both weredecommissioned in 1931.

Lapwing Class AVP-1through -9—1919


Type: Minesweeper refitted as small seaplane tender.Builder: Various U.S. shipyards; lead ship built by Todd Shipyard,

Brooklyn, New York.Total built: 9 (USN)Machinery: One 1,400-shp vertical triple expansion steam engine and

a geared, single- shaft drive.Displacement: 1,350 tons standard (as modified).Dimensions: Length 187 ft. 10 in. overall; beam 35 ft. 6 in.; draft 13 ft.

1 in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Two 3-in./50-cal. dual- purpose guns in open

mounts.

Performance: Top speed 13.5 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: One floatplane embarked.Crew complement: 78

Over a 16-year interval following World War I, the Navyassigned nine Lapwing class minesweepers for use as smallseaplane tenders. Ordered in 1917 as the first type of naval shipdedicated to minesweeping, the 49 Lapwings completed be-tween 1918 and 1920 had been designed around an ocean- goingtug hull and came with booms for towing and hoisting. One ofthe last examples built, USS Sandpiper AM-51 (later AVP-9),was the first actually assigned to the aviation branch when itwas directly commissioned as a seaplane support ship inOctober 1919. Eight more of the class followed: Pelican AM-27 (later AVP-6) in 1922; Heron AM-10 (later AVP-2) in 1924;Avocet AM-19 (later AVP-4); Teal AM-23 (later AVP-5), SwanAM-34 (later AVP-7), and Gannet AM-41 (later AVP-8), all in1931; Lapwing AM-1 (later AVP-1) in 1932; and finally, ThrushAM-18 (AVP-2) in 1935. Conversion typically involved remov-ing the minesweeping equipment to clear the aft deck for sea-plane servicing. Existing booms were used for handling aircraft.The ships were initially classified as “minesweeper for dutywith aircraft” but re- designated “small seaplane tender” (AVP)in early 1936 in original hull number order. From 1936 to 1941,USS Owl AM-2 was assigned to aviation duties on the EastCoast but never reclassified as an AVP.

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, the Lapwings served withseaplane and patrol units based on both coasts, includingHawaii and the Panama Canal Zone, and frequently worked inconjunction with the larger seaplane tenders. During WorldWar II, as more of the new Barnegat class AVPs (see below)


The Gannet AM-41 (later AVP-8) depicted in 1927 with aviation insignia on bow. Gannet and the other Lapwings comprised most ofthe Navy’s small seaplane tender fleet up to World War II.

came into service, many of the Lapwings were relegated toother duties such as towing, salvage, transport, and training.All were decommissioned and either sold or scrapped after1945.

Harding DD-91—1920TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Destroyer modified as a seaplane tender.Builder: Union Iron Works, San Francisco, California.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: 27,000-shp steam turbines with four boilers and a geared,

two- shaft drive.Displacement: 1,060 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 314 ft. 5 in. overall; beam 31 ft. 8 in., draft 8 ft. 6

in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Four 4-in./50-cal. guns in open mounts and four

triple 21-in. torpedo tubes.Performance: Top speed 35 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: None embarked.Crew complement: 100

Harding began life as one of 111 Wickes class destroyersordered in 1917. Shortly after being commissioned in early 1919,it served as a guide ship for the transatlantic flights of theCurtiss NC boats (see page 141), then following a permanentassignment to seaplane operations, underwent a brief refit atthe Philadelphia Navy Yard. Conversions details are unknownbut possibly included removal of torpedo tubes and associatedequipment. From mid–1920 until mid–1921, Harding served inconjunction with the seaplane training program at NAS Pen-sacola and was detached during the summer of 1921 to observethe sinking of the ex–German battleship Ostfriesland and other

obsolete warships by Brig Gen. Billy Mitchell’s First AirBrigade. The ship was decommissioned in mid–1922.

Wright AV-1 (AZ-1)—1921TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Auxiliary vessel completed as airship and balloon tender, thenbecame a seaplane tender.

Builder: American International Shipbuilding Corp., Hog Island,Pennsylvania.

Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: One 6,000-shp GE steam turbine with six boilers and a

geared, single- shaft drive.Displacement: 11,500 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 448 ft. overall; beam 58 ft.; draft 23 ft. (loaded)Defensive armament: Two 5-in./51-cal. and two 3-in/50-cal. guns in

open mounts and two flexible .30-cal. machine guns.Performance: Top speed 15 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: Large enough to embark an F-5L or NC- type flying boat.Crew complement: 228

Originally laid down in early 1919 as a fleet auxiliary, theship was subsequently finished out as an airship and balloontender under the hull designation AZ-1 and commissioned USSWright on December 16, 1921. While Wright did subsequentlyconduct some trials with kite balloons, most of its early servicerelated to seaplane operations. Following an extensive refit atthe Norfolk Navy Yard in 1925, in which all balloon and airshiphandling equipment was removed and replaced by aircraft hoist-ing booms and repair facilities, the ship, re- designated AV-1,became the first Navy vessel actually classified as a seaplanetender. From 1925 onwards, Wright remained on the East Coastas the flagship for the Air Squadron Scouting Fleet, providing


The Wright, seen here at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 1927 while serving as the flagship for Air Scouting Fleet, was the first Navy shipto be designated as a seaplane tender (AV).

tender service to seaplanes operating out of Norfolk, Key West,the Caribbean, and the Panama Canal Zone. The ship movedto NAS North Island in San Diego in early 1932 and from there,supported seaplane operations all over the eastern Pacific fromAlaska to Hawaii.

After a major overhaul at Mare Island Shipyard during1936, Wright became the flagship for Patrol Wing 1, then in late1939, transferred its flag to Patrol Wing 2 and moved to PearlHarbor, where it assisted efforts to establish aviation bases onMidway, Canton, Johnston, and Wake Islands. When the Japa-nese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Wright wasreturning to Hawaii after having delivered personnel and sup-plies to the bases at Wake and Midway Islands. In the weeksright after the attack, the ship was used to transport Marinesand equipment to Midway and bring civilians back to PearlHarbor. From early 1942 until late 1944, Wright saw wideservice in the South Pacific, where it acted in the dual roles ofseaplane tender to patrol units and transport for Marine aviationpersonnel and supplies to various island bases. In October 1944the ship was re- designated AG-79 as a headquarters ship, af-terward operating out of New Guinea, Australia, and the Philip-pines until the war’s end. Wright was decommissioned in 1946and sold for scrap in 1948.

Patoka AO-9 (AV-6)—1924TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Fleet oiler refitted as airship tender.Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co., Newport

News, Virginia.Total built: 1 (USN)Machinery: Two 2,600-shp vertical triple expansion steam engines

and a geared, two-shaft drive.

Displacement: 16,800 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 417 ft. 10 in. overall; beam 60 ft.; draft 26 ft. 2

in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Two 5-in./51-cal. guns in open mounts.Performance: Top speed 11 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: One airship moored aft.Crew complement: 168

Though retaining a fleet oiler designation, Patoka becamethe most important support vessel in the Navy’s rigid airshipprogram. The ship was commissioned in October 1919 and spentseveral years as an oiler before entering the Norfolk Navy Ship-yard in early 1924 to be fitted with a large (141 ft. above the wa-terline) mooring mast on its aft end together with repair andstorage facilities for airship operations. From mid–1924 to early1933, Patoka served off the Atlantic seaboard and in the Gulfof Mexico and Caribbean in support of all rigid airship opera-tions at sea. It completed the first mooring trials with the airshipShenandoah in mid–1924 and after that airship’s loss, becamea base ship for Los Angeles (1925–1932) and ultimately, Akron(1932–1933). Following the loss of Akron in April 1933, theship was removed from active service and placed in reservelater the same year.

Patoka was re- commissioned as AV-6 in November 1939and assigned to Patrol Wing 5 at San Diego, but after less thana year of service, was reassigned to the Naval TransportationService at Norfolk and reverted to the designation AO-9.Through most of World War II, the ship operated out of Norfolkas a tanker and cargo carrier between ports in the Caribbeanand South America. It was decommissioned for the last timein 1946 and sold for scrap in 1948.


The Patoka shown in 1924 with ZR-1 Shenandoah moored aft. It served as a base ship for all of the Navy’s large rigid airships from1924 until 1933.

Jason AV-2—1930TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Coal collier refitted as airship tender.Builder: Maryland Steel Co., Sparrows Point, MarylandTotal built: 1 (USN)Machinery: Vertical triple expansion steam engine (shp unknown) and

a single- shaft drive.Displacement: 19,250 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 536 ft. overall; beam 65 ft.; draft 27 ft. 8 in.

(loaded)Defensive armament: Four 4-in./50-cal. guns in open mounts.Performance: Top speed 14 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: Up to 8 floatplanes embarked.Crew complement: 82

USS Jason AC-12served as a fleet coalcollier from 1913 until1925, when it wastransferred to aviationduties with the AsiaticFleet based at Cavite inthe Philippine Islands.The ship was not ex-tensively modified, itsdeck space and holdsbeing used primarily totransport aircraft, per-sonnel, and aviationsupplies to various lo-cations in the Far East.Jason was re- desig -nated AV-2 in early

1930, presumably to reflect that it was no longer classified acoal collier. After being detached from the Asiatic Fleet in mid–1932, the ship returned to the West Coast and was decommis-sioned at the Navy Yard in Bremerton, Washington later thesame year. It was stricken and sold in 1936.

Langley AV-3—1937 see Langley CV-1 underAIRCRAFT CARRIERS

Childs Class AVD-1through -14—1939


Type: Destroyer refitted as small seaplanetender.Builder: Various U.S. shipyards: lead shipbuilt by New York Shipbuilding Corp.,Camden, New Jersey.Total built: 14 (USN)Machinery: Two 13,325-shp steam tur-bines with four boilers and a geared, two- shaft drive.Displacement: 1,215 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 314 ft. 4 in. overall;beam 31 ft. 8 in.; draft 9 ft. 10 in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Two 4-in./50-cal.guns in open mounts fore and aft and four.50-cal. machine guns amidships (later re-placed by eight 20-mm AA guns).Performance: Top speed 25 knots; range5,600 mi.Aircraft: None embarked.Crew complement: 137

In order to keep pace with itsrapidly expanding force of patrol air-craft (i.e., 209 Consolidated PBYsprocured between 1936 and 1938), the


The Jason AV-2 seen coaling at Pearl Harbor in early 1932. Note the float-equipped MartinT4Ms carried amidships between the coal derricks. The ship was detached from aviationservice later the same year.

The Childs, name ship of the class, is seen after wartime refit with revised bridge and antiaircraft gunmounts forward of funnels. Forward boilers had been removed to accommodate storage tanks for aviationfuel.

Navy initiated an emergency program during 1938 to converta number of older World War I–era Clemson class four- stackdestroyers into small seaplane tenders, commencing in mid–1938 with the USS Childs at the Philadelphia Navy Yard. Con-version entailed removing the two forward boilers and stacksand using the added space to extend the bridge superstructureas quarters for aviation personnel, storage tanks for aviationfuel, and space for aircraft spare parts. All torpedo tubes andthe two amidships 4-in./50-cal. guns were removed and four.50-cal. machine guns added in their place. (Note, during WorldWar II, 20-mm AA gun mounts were retrofitted and some ofthese ships replaced their 4-in. guns with 3-in. dual- purposetypes.)

Initially, the converted ships were classified as AVPs, butthis changed to AVD (aviation tender, destroyer) in late 1940,indicating their dual status as escorts. In all, 14 destroyers hadbeen converted by the end of 1940: Childs AVD-1 (ex–DD-241,ex–AVP-14), Williamson AVD-2 (ex–DD-244, ex–AVP-15),George E. Badger AVD-3 (ex–DD-196, ex–AVP-16), ClemsonAVD-4 (ex–DD-186, ex–AVP-17), Goldsborough AVD-5 (ex–DD-188, ex–AVP-18), Hulbert AVD-6 (ex–DD-342, ex–AVP-19), William B. Preston AVD-7 (ex–DD-344, ex–AVP-20),Belknap AVD-8 (ex–DD-251), Osmond Ingram AVD-9 (ex–DD-255), Ballard AVD-10 (ex–DD-267), Thornton AVD-11(ex–DD-270), Gillis AVD-12 (ex–DD-260), Greene AVD-13(ex–DD-266), and McFarland AVD-14 (ex–DD-237). From1941 through the middle of World War II, most AVDs were de-ployed in the Pacific Theater, establishing and supporting ad-vance aviation bases as needed. But as more of the newerBarnegat class tenders began reaching service during 1942 and1943, many of the AVDs were relegated to other duties such asconvoy escort, ASW patrol, and plane guard and support forescort carriers. Some were converted as high- speed transports(APD) to be used in amphibious operations. Virtually all weredecommissioned and sold for scrap after 1945.

Curtiss Class AV-4 and -5—1940TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Type: Heavy seaplane tender.Builder: New York Shipbuilding Corp., Camden, New Jersey.Total built: 2 (USN)Machinery: Two 6,000-shp steam turbines with four boilers and a

geared, two- shaft drive.Displacement: 8,671 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 527 ft. 4 in. overall; beam 69 ft. 3 in.; draft 21ft.

11 in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Four 5-in./38-cal. dual- purpose guns in turrets

and 20-mm AA guns in four quadruple mounts.Performance: Top speed 20 knots; range 12,000 mi. (est.).Aircraft: Several flying boats embarked on rear working deck.Crew complement: 1,195.

The Curtiss class is noteworthy in having been the firsttype of Navy vessel to be built from the keel up as a seaplanetender. Both ships of the class, AV-4 and -5, were laid down inmid–1939 and launched in mid–1940. They had been conceivedto function as base ships for long- range patrol seaplanes oper-

ating in forward areas, with onboard facilities to provide main-tenance, repair, and logistical support for the aircraft, as wellas command and control over the aviation personnel attachedto them. The general design emphasized good open- ocean sea- keeping, featuring a high- freeboard forward and a low super-structure, with the aft one- third of the deck being left clear asa large seaplane working platform. The superstructure areaabutting the platform housed extensive shops that performedaircraft maintenance and repair. AV-4 was commissioned USSCurtiss on April 20, 1940, followed by AV-5 USS Albemarleon December 20.

Curtiss operated out of NOB Norfolk until the spring of1941, completing a fit out and shakedown that included instal-lation of CXAM-1, then sailed to Pearl Harbor for permanentduty assignment. During the Japanese attack on December 7,the ship sustained damage from an enemy aircraft crashing intoit and a bomb hit that necessitated repairs at San Diego, afterwhich it operated out of Pearl Harbor until mid–1942, when ittook station in the Solomon Islands. From mid–1943 to early1945, Curtiss was used to support the invasion campaigns atTarawa, Kwajalein, Eniwetok, Saipan, and Guam, then in May1945, after an overhaul, served as a command ship at Okinawawhere it sustained damage from a Kamikaze. Following repairsand refit, the ship remained in service during the postwar era,supporting seaplane operations until being decommissioned inSeptember 1957. Albemarle, also fitted with radar, was assignedto the Atlantic after commissioning and based at NOB Norfolkat the time hostilities commenced. During World War II theship provided tender services to seaplane operations across thelength and breath of the Atlantic, including deployments fromIceland, the British Isles, Cuba, the Panama Canal Zone, andBrazil. After 1945, it continued in postwar service as a seaplanetender until being decommissioned in October 1960.

Barnegat Class AVP-10, -11,-12, -20 and -21—1941


Type: Small seaplane tender.Builder: Various U.S. shipyards; lead ship built by Puget Sound Navy

Yard, Bremerton, Washington.Total built: 5 by the end of 1941; 30 from 1942 to 1945 (USN)Machinery: Two 3,000-shp diesel- electric engines and a two- shaft

drive.Displacement: 2,411 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 311 ft. 8 in. overall; beam 41 ft. 1 in.; draft 13 ft. 6

in. (loaded)Defensive armament: Two 5-in./38-cal. dual- purpose guns in turrets

and four 50-cal. machine guns (40-mm and 20-mm AA gunsadded later).

Performance: Top speed 18.5 knots; range 6,900 mi.Aircraft: 1 floatplane embarked.Crew complement: 367.

Planned in the late 1930s as a successor to the Lapwings,the AVP-10 Class appeared as the Navy’s first purpose- builtsmall seaplane tender. In addition to possessing better repair,


supply, and handling facilities for aircraft, these shallow- draftships were designed to operate from the small bays and inletsof forward combat areas and also be able to use their armament,speed, and maneuverability in the role of escorts for larger ten-ders and other auxiliaries. The first two ships completed, USSBarnegat AV-10 and USS Biscayne AVP-11, were both laid downin late 1939 and commissioned the same day, on July 3, 1941.Following them into service before the end of 1941 were Hum-bolt AVP-21 (October 7), Matagorda AVP-22 (December 16),and Casco AVP-12 (December 27). Hull numbers 14 through20 were skipped when they were temporarily allocated to theChilds class in 1940.

Thirty more Barnegat class tenders were placed in com-mission between 1942 and 1946, with six examples in variousstages of construction being cancelled prior to acceptance. Theysaw extensive service in every theater of combat during WorldWar II, a majority in the Pacific. Four were subsequently com-pleted as PT Boat tenders (AGP) prior to commissioning andone as a catapult training ship. Only six of the Barnegat classwere retained in postwar service as seaplane tenders, thoughseveral more were reactivated during the Korean conflict, thevery last example being retired in 1966. In 1948 and 1949, 14mothballed Barnegats were transferred to the Coast Guardwhere some served until the early 1970s. Two, following con-versions, became Navy oceanographic survey ships (AGS) andremained active until the late 1960s.

Ironically, four Coast guard ships transferred to the Re-public of Vietnam Navy in 1971 were seized by the North Viet-namese in 1975.

Tangier Class AV-8 and -9—1941


Type: Heavy seaplane tender.Builder: Various U.S. shipyards; lead ship built by Moore Drydock

Co., Oakland, California.Total built: 2 by the end 1941; 5 from 1942 to 1945 (USN)Machinery: One 8,500-shp steam turbine with two boilers and a

geared, single- shaft drive.Displacement: 11,760 tons standard.Dimensions: Length 492 ft. 1 in. overall; beam 69 ft. 6 in.; draft 23 ft.

9 in. (loaded)Defensive armament: One 5-in./38-cal. and three 3-in./50-cal. dual-

purpose guns in open mounts and eight 40-mm AA guns.Performance: Top speed 18.5 knots; range (not reported).Aircraft: One flying boat and several floatplanes embarked on rear

working deck.Crew complement: 1,075.

By the middle of 1940 it had become clear that the additionof two Curtiss class heavy seaplane tenders to the fleet later inthe year would not be adequate to support the growing numbersof new patrol aircraft (i.e., PBYs, PB2Ys, and PBMs) expectedto enter service from 1942 onwards. As a stopgap measure, theNavy acquired two incomplete C3-type merchant vessels inmid–1940 with plans to convert them into a heavy tenderconfiguration. Changes to the basic merchant layout includedprovision for a large seaplane working deck aft of the bridgesuperstructure and a large hoisting crane at the stern. Cargoholds would be remade into personnel quarters, storage areasfor fuel, lubricants, and spares, and repair facilities for aircraft.The name ship of the class, USS Tangier AV-8, was actuallythe second to be commissioned on August 25, 1941, having beenpreceded by USS Pocomoke AV-9 on July 18. A third example


The Tangier, commissioned in August 1941, as seen in San Francisco Bay in September 1942. Its C3 merchant vessel origins areevident from this photograph. Seven of the class were in service by the end of 1945.

of the class (later became USS Chandeleur AV-10) was acquiredin mid–1941 but not completed until late 1942. After the U.S.entered World War II, seven more C3 conversions were ordered,four of which reached service in 1944 (i.e., AV-14 through AV-17), the other three being cancelled prior to completion.

Tangier, assigned to Patrol Wing 2 at Pearl Harbor aftercompleting sea trials, was present at the time of the Japaneseattack on December 7 and participated in the rescue ofsurvivors from the capsized ex- battleship Utah. It remained inthe Pacific for the duration of the war, taking part in the Battleof the Coral Sea in May 1942 and thereafter providing tenderservices in the Solomon campaign, the invasion of the Philip-pines, and later still, the occupation of Japan. The ship was de-commissioned and placed in reserve in 1947 and finally soldfor scrap in 1961. Sistership Pocomoke was initially attached toPatrol Wing 7 out of NOB Norfolk but transferred to the PacificTheater in late 1942. The ship was used mainly to transport mil-itary personnel, supplies, and ammunition to various combatcommands and saw only intermittent service as a seaplane ten-der. It was decommissioned in 1946 and sold for scrap in 1961.

Note on AV-7 Class Heavy Seaplane Tenders. Hull num-ber AV-7 had been reserved for an improved Curtiss class vesselwhich was not laid down until late 1942, ultimately enteringservice in June 1944 as the USS Currituk, and three more shipsof this class reached service before the end of 1945: NortonSound AV-11, Pine Island AV-12, and Salisbury Sound AV-13.

SEAPLANE-EQUIPPED WARSHIPS

Battleships

The Battle Fleet after World War I. Following the dis-armament of Germany, the U.S. Navy possessed the world’ssecond largest fleet of battleships (Great Britain was first), num-

bering fifteen “pre- dreadnought” types (BB-12 through -22 and-25 through -29), six “dreadnaught” types (BB-30 through -35), and six “super dreadnaught” types (BB-36 through -41),with a further thirteen super dreadnaughts still under construc-tion. Under the restrictions imposed by the Washington NavyTreaty of 1922, all of the Navy’s pre- dreadnaughts were soondecommissioned and scrapped and seven of the eight incom -plete super dreadnaughts (BB-47, and BB-49 through -54) werecancelled before they could be commissioned. Then in 1931, toconform with the requirements set forth in the newer LondonNaval Treaty of 1930, the fleet was downsized by three dread-naughts, Florida (BB-30) being decommissioned and scrappedand Utah (BB-31) and Wyoming (BB-32) both demilitarizedand turned into gunnery training ships AG-16 and -17, respec-tively. No new battleship construction was authorized until1937, following adoption of the Second London Naval Treatyin 1936, which placed limits on displacement and gun size butnot numbers. The first two examples, both ordered in mid–1937,entered service with the fleet during 1941 as North Carolina(BB-55) and Washington (BB-56). The Navy placed orders foreight more new battleships between 1938 and 1940 (BB-57through -64), but none would reach service before the end of1941.

As a consequence of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harboron December 7, 1941, the centerpiece of fleet tactical doctrine,the battle line, ceased to exist as an effective fighting force. Ofthe eight battleships present, Oklahoma (BB-37) and Arizona(BB-39) were total losses; California (BB-44) and West Vir -ginia (B-48), both sunk, did not rejoin the fleet until mid–1944;Nevada (BB-36), heavily damaged and grounded, re turned toservice in late 1942; Pennsylvania (BB-38), damaged in dry-dock, resumed operations in mid–1942; and Maryland (BB-46)and Tennessee (BB-42), both escaping with slight damage, re-turned to service during early 1942.

Catapult Development. Although several types of cata-


Super-dreadnought Pennsylvania (BB-38) seen in the mid–1920s carrying two UO-1s on Type-A stern catapult, before the Type-Pcatapult was fitted to the no. 3 main turret.

pults had been tried aboard Navy warships prior to World War I,the first truly practical turntable catapult, the Type A Mark I,powered by compressed air, did not appear until 1920. Suc -cessful shipboard launch tests using a Vought VE-7H (see page104) were carried out in 1922 with a single Type A fitted to theUSS Maryland, and similar catapult installations followed onNevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Arizona, New Mexico (BB-40), Mississippi (BB-41), Idaho (BB-42), Tennessee, California,Colorado (BB-45), and West Virginia. All of the ships men-tioned featured a four- turret super- dreadnaught main armamentlayout which permitted a catapult and hoisting crane to be sitedaft of the number four turret near the stern. The Type P MarkIII catapult, driven by an 8-inch powder charge that couldpropel a 6,000-lb. floatplane to 60 mph within 60 feet, was in-troduced in 1923 as a fixed mounting on top of a battleship’smain turret, the first installation being tested aboard Mississippi

in 1924. Type Ps were thereafter fitted as a second catapultaboard all eleven super dreadnaughts and became the singlecatapult on older dreadnaughts such as Florida, Utah, Wyo -ming, Arkansas (BB-33), New York (BB-34), and Texas (BB-35). Starting in the late 1920s, the Type P Mark VI (or P-6)lightweight, powder- charged turntable catapult, capable oflaunching 6,350-lb. aircraft to a flying speed of 64 mph, begansuperceding Type As and became standard on all battleships.When battleship construction resumed in 1937, all of the newships (BB-55 and up) appeared with two Type P-6 catapults in-stalled aft near the stern and none mounted to turrets.

Aircraft Utilization. Aircraft became integral to fleet bat-tleship tactics during the 1920s. Navy experiments conductedin early 1919 with aircraft functioning as spotters for the bigguns demonstrated a 200 percent average increase in accuracyfor hits on targets beyond 18,000 yards. As an interim measure


The New Mexico (BB-40) seen in the late 1930s with one O3U-3 on the turret catapult and second on the stern catapult. The shipwas still en route to the West Coast when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

P-6 Catapult

War surplus Nieuport 28 on platform atop Arizona’s (BB-39) no. 3 turret. After launching from the platform, aircraft would landin the water and inflate flotation bags. Sopwith 11⁄2 Strutter is being hoisted aboard Oklahoma (BB-37) in 1920 or 1921. Strutters werethe first “turret fighters” equipped with radios.

Floatplanes, like this O2U-1 seen on the Tennessee’s (BB-43) aft catapult in the late 1920s, became an essential ingredient of battleshipcombat operations after World War I. The lineup of OS2Us on New York’s (BB-34) catapult in 1942. The tactical role of floatplanesas gun spotters diminished after fast carrier task forces assumed primacy over the traditional battle line.

from 1919 to 1922, most battleships received a complement ofseveral war- surplus landplane fighters (e.g., Sopwith Camels,R.A.F. S.E.5as, Hanriot Scouts, Sopwith 11⁄2 Strutters, and Nieu-port 28s), which were launched from wooden “flying- off ” plat-forms built onto the turrets and recovered in the water via flo-tation bags. Then, starting in 1922, concurrent with catapultdevelopment, NAF- built Vought VE-7Hs, stressed for catapult-ing, became the first standard floatplane type to be deployedaboard battleships. After efforts during 1923 and 1924 todevelop a larger type of armed floatplane for battleship opera-tions met with little success, (see Martin MO and Naval AircraftFactory NO/Martin M2O on pages 109–111), the Vought UO(see page 108), which was essentially an improved VE-7H, be-came the next type of aircraft to be adopted for standard ship-board use. The idea of basing fighters aboard battleships to pro-tect the fleet against potential air attack was implementedbetween 1925 and 1927 when float- equipped variants of the Cur-tiss TS (see page 61) and Vought FU (see page 108) were as-signed to several battleships, but the scheme was dropped infavor of carrier- borne fighters after Lexington and Saratoga be-came fully operational within the fleet after 1928.

During 1927 and 1928, Vought O2Us, the Navy’s first real purpose- built ship- based floatplane (see page 115), displacedUOs aboard most battleships, and within a similar timeframe,some ships increased their seaplane complement to include oneLoening OL amphibian (see page 112) that could serve eitheras a spotter or a ship- to- shore utility transport. Further improve-ments upon the basic design of the O2U resulted in the intro-duction of the Vought O3U (see page 116) in 1931 as the fleet’sstandard battleship floatplane. As new hangar- equipped heavycruisers entered service during the early 1930s, BuAer beganthe trend of issuing distinct requirements between floatplanes,those intended for cruiser duty being classified as scout-

observation (SO) and those for battleships as observation- scout(OS). With the aim of replacing O3Us and procuring additionalfloatplanes for the new battleships planned (i.e., BB-55 and -56), BuAer issued a new OS requirement in 1936, however, offi-cial trials between competing prototypes (see Vought OS2U,Naval Aircraft Factory OSN, and Stearman OSS, pages 132–134) became protracted to the extent that folding- wing CurtissSOCs (see page 129) were assigned to all battleships from 1938until they were replaced by Vought OS2Us in 1940 and 1941.OS2Us went on to equip all new battleships commissioned be-tween 1942 and 1944 (i.e., BB-57 through -64), many servingright up through the end of the war in 1945.

Unit Organization. Initially, aircraft assigned to battle -ships were simply classified as “Ship Air Units, Battle Fleet,”but starting in 1926, were reorganized into squadrons under thedesignator VO (heavier- than- air observation), with at least onesquadron of twelve to thirteen floatplanes apiece being allocatedto each of the four battleship divisions existing at that time.The suffix “B” following the squadron number (e.g., VO-1B)indicated assignment to the Battle Fleet and “S” to the ScoutingFleet (e.g., VO-5S). The VO squadron numbers between bat-tleship divisions were not sequential inasmuch as they were in-terspersed with squadrons assigned to cruiser divisions andshore bases. During the late 1920s the fleet began differentiatingbetween battleship and cruiser units, the former retaining theVO designator and the latter becoming VS and later still, VCS.

Cruisers

Cruiser Procurement after World War I. At the time ofthe Armistice, the U.S. Navy’s active cruiser inventory includednine outdated ships classified as armored cruisers (ACR, laterCA), all completed in the 1890s, and thirteen equally obsolete


The Pensacola (CA-24), the first Treaty Cruiser commissioned in 1929, is seen in the early 1930s with an O3U-1 sited on its portcatapult. Floatplane scouts allowed cruisers to remain near the main body of the fleet.

protected and peace cruisers (C, later CL) that had been placedin commission between 1895 and 1905. Wartime experience hadlargely reshaped the role of cruisers from one of distant oper-ations (e.g., solitary scouting and commerce raiding) to activedefense of the fleet against surface and air attack. New shipshad been ordered during 1917 and 1918, ten high- speed scoutcruisers (CS-4 through -13), but were still in the early stages ofconstruction. With the adoption of the Washington Naval Treatyof 1922, and the consequent limits placed on battleship tonnage,the protective function of cruisers became more vital. And per-haps most significant, the Treaty itself defined “cruisers” asships limited to a maximum displacement of 10,000 tons stan-dard, mounting guns no greater than 8 inches. The LondonNaval Treaty of 1930 took the definition a step further by clas-sifying cruisers with 8-inch guns as “heavy” and those with6.1-inch or less as “light,” with the United States being allowedthe tonnage to build 18 heavy cruisers (CA) and approximately15 light cruisers (CL).

Treaty provisions, combined with the general need to mod-ernize the fleet, resulted in an across- the- board replacement ofthe Navy’s entire cruiser force during the period between theworld wars. All nine of the old armored cruisers were eitherdecommissioned or converted to non- combat duties; six of thesmaller peace cruisers were retained in the postwar fleet aslight cruisers (CL-16 through -21) but all had been stricken fromactive service by end of 1931. The ten Omaha class scoutcruisers under construction, re- designated as light cruisers (CL-4 through -13), all entered service in 1923 and 1924. Con-

struction of what were termed “Treaty Cruisers” commencedin 1926 and continued through 1939. Eighteen ships in fiveclasses reached commission as heavy cruisers: two Pensacolaclass in 1929 and 1930 (originally CL-24 and CL-25, changedto CA-24 and -25 in 1931); six Northampton class in 1930 and1931 (CA-26 through -31); two Portland class in 1932 and 1933(CA-33 and -35); seven New Orleans class between 1934 and1937 (CA-32, -34, -36 through -39, and -44); and one Wichitaclass in 1939 (CA-45). These were augmented by nineadditional ships, built in two classes, placed in service as lightcruisers: seven Brooklyn class in 1937 and 1938 (CL-40 through-48); and two St. Louis class in 1939 (CL-49 and -50). The USSAtlanta (CL-51), commissioned in late 1941, was the first of aseries of eleven light cruisers specialized for antiaircraft whichhad been designed with no provision for seaplanes. Three lightcruisers, Raleigh (CL-7), Honolulu (CL-48), and Helena (CL-50), sustained varying degrees of bomb damage at Pearl Harborduring the Japanese attack on December 7, 1941, but all wererepaired and returned to service by mid–1942.

Catapult and Hangar Development. Cruisers began car-rying floatplanes as early as 1924, but installation of catapultson the ten Omaha class light cruisers did not commence until1927, when Memphis (CL-13) received two Type A Mark IIIturntable catapults mounted to the main deck aft of the funnels.Type P-6 lightweight, powder- charged turntable catapults, ini-tially fitted to the Pensacola class heavy cruisers during con-struction, became the standard type for all cruisers that followedit, and from 1932, P-6s were also retrofitted to the Omahas. On


This late 1930s photograph depicts two SOC-1 embarked aboard the catapults of light cruiser Omaha (CL-4). The Omaha class begancarrying floatplanes in mid–1920s before being fitted with catapults.

the Pensacola, Portland, and Northampton classes, the catapultswere mounted on tall pylons between the funnels to permitlaunching of aircraft in heavy seas, and a similar configurationappeared on the New Orleans class aft of both funnels. Startingwith the Brooklyn class light cruisers and the heavy cruiser Wi-chita, the catapults were sited aft near the stern. The Northamp-tons were the first cruiser class to feature a pair of seaplanehangars incorporated into the superstructure surrounding thenumber two funnel. To fit within it, the wings of the aircraftneeded to fold to a width of no more than 14 feet 6 inches. TheBrooklyn class and the Wichita relocated the hangar all the wayaft as a single hold between the two catapults into which theaircraft could be lowered by a stern- mounted crane, and anidentical arrangement appeared on all Baltimore class heavycruisers (15 ships) and Cleveland class light cruisers (30 ships)commissioned during World War II.

Aircraft Utilization. As much as with battleships, aircraftbecame a builtin component of cruiser operations during the1920s. In their scouting and screening role, use of floatplanesequipped with radios permitted cruisers to canvass huge areasof ocean without distancing themselves from the fleet.

Vought UOs, the same type of floatplane used on battle-ships, were first assigned to the Omaha class light cruisers in1924 before catapults had been fitted, then in 1927, as these

ships received Type A catapults, the UOs were succeeded inservice by the newer Vought O2Us. A new requirement issuedby BuAer in 1929 for a “light observation floatplane” resultedin the delivery 39 Berliner- Joyce OJ-2s in 1933 for serviceaboard the Omahas. Meanwhile, as the new Pensacola andNorthampton class heavy cruisers began entering service be-tween 1929 and 1931, they were all assigned Vought O2Us orO3Us, typically three aircraft per ship.

Efforts to find a folding- wing aircraft that could be ac-commodated in the hangars of the Northamptons and succeed-ing heavy cruiser classes began in 1931 when BuAer issued arequirement for a single- engine amphibian; however, all threeof the prototypes subsequently evaluated in 1932 and 1933 (seeGreat Lakes SG, Loening S2L, and Sikorsky SS, pages 126 –128) were deemed unsatisfactory. A new requirement issued in1933 ended with selection of the folding- wing Curtiss SOC in1935 (see page 129) as the fleet’s standard cruiser floatplane,the type being thereafter assigned to all heavy and light cruisersin service, including those without hangars. In 1937, parallelto the effort that produced the monoplane Vought OS2U forbattleships, BuAer issued a requirement for a float- equippedmonoplane to replace SOC biplanes aboard cruisers. TheCurtiss SO3C (see page 136) was ultimately selected for pro-duction in 1940, but none began reaching service until the


By the late 1920s, floatplanes had been fully integrated into cruiser operations. This O2U-1 was being lowered onto one of the catapultsaboard the Cincinnati (CL-6) in 1928 or 1929.

spring of 1942. Ironically, operational short-comings of the SO3C subsequently caused itto be withdrawn from shipboard service, asa result of which, the older biplane SOCs re-mained aboard most cruisers right up throughthe end of World War II.

Unit Organization. In 1926, like aircraftattached to battleships, floatplanes servingaboard cruisers were organized into observa-tion squadrons, with the aircraft and per son -nel of one squadron of fourteen to fifteen air-craft typically allocated between two cruiserdivisions. These units switched from VO tothe designator VS (heavier- than- air, scouting)in 1929, also using the suffix “B” to indicateBattle Fleet and “S” Scouting Fleet, andchanged again to VCS (cruiser scouting) in1937 to differentiate them from the expandingnumber of VS squadrons of the Carrier AirGroups. By 1939 the VCS force had grownto eight squadrons serving aboard 36 lightand heavy cruisers.

Note on CLV/CF Flying Deck Cruiser.From the late 1920s right up to 1940, navalofficials, in particular those of BuShips, stud-ied the feasibility of a hybrid warship thatwould combine the frontal aspect of a six- inch gun light cruiser with a carrier- typeflight deck having an island structure on thestarboard side. The ships was envisaged asoperating along the sea lanes as a lone hunter,similar on some respects to the commerce- raiding cruisers of the pre–World Warera. BuShips developed several imagi-native concepts, emerging finally witha 650- foot- long vessel of 10,000 tonsdisplacement that combined the three- turret forward armament of a Brooklynclass light cruiser with a 350-foot flightdeck and hangar space that housed upto 24 aircraft. Its original CLV (light cruiser- carrier) hull designation waslater changed to CF to avoid confusionwith the anticipated CVL (light carrier)hull classification. Although the concept


Right, top: An SOC-1 undergoing main-tenance in a seaplane hangar aboard theSavannah (CL-42), one of seven Brook-lyn class light treaty cruisers enteringservice in 1937 and 1938. Right, bottom:Off Iceland during 1941, the Tuscaloosa(CA-37) is seen hoisting aboard an SOC-1. The seaplane hangar is visible justbelow the other SOC-1 resting on thestarboard catapult.

received serious consideration, it remained on hold due to budg-etary restraints imposed by the Depression. The Navy Board,amid plans for a huge fleet expansion in 1940, officially can-celled the project after concluding the hybrid design possessedinherent limitations that would render it unsuitable as either acruiser or an aircraft carrier.

Other Warships

Submarines. Influenced by earlier German and Britishexperiments with submarine- carried aircraft, the Navy acquiredtwo German- made Caspar U-1 submarine scouts in 1922 forevaluations at NAS Anacostia. Following trials with the U-1s,BuAer issued a specific requirement later that year for a verysmall (18-ft. wingspan by 18 ft. 2 in. length) twin- float biplanethat could be dismantled and stowed in an eight- foot- diameterwatertight tube mounted on a submarine‘s afterdeck. Contractswere subsequently issued in 1923 for 12 essentially identical

aircraft, six wooden- framed variants to be built by Cox- Kleminas the XS-1 plus six with metal frames by Martin as the MS-1(see both, page 110). While the aircraft were being delivered tothe Navy, the submarine S-1 (SS-105) was set aside to be fittedwith the stowage tube. Operational tests with S-1 and one ofthe Martin MS-1s commenced in late 1923 on the Thames Rivernear the submarine base at New London, Connecticut and con-tinued off and on until mid–1926, at which point the programwas deemed impractical because of the excessive time required(four hours) to assemble and launch the aircraft.

After four years of inactivity, BuAer opted to revive the submarinescout project with the idea of using a small, boat- hulled monoplane that could be unstowed and rigged for flightat a much faster rate than a biplane, and with this concept inmind, awarded Loening a development contract in 1930 to builda single prototype as the XSL-1 (see page 120). Testing of theprototype in 1931, while showing that the aircraft could bestowed and unstowed in a matter of minutes, revealed that it


CLV-CF Flying Deck Cruiser Concept

An MS-1 submarine scout seen during trials with S-1 (SS-105) in the mid–1920s. The concept ultimately was deemed impractical dueto the time required to assemble and disassemble the aircraft.

was seriously underpowered, and further attempts in 1933 withthe re- engined XSL-2 produced only slight improvements inperformance. The project was cancelled in late 1933 when theprototype was irreparably damaged during experiments with asubmarine.

Destroyers. The Navy originally tested the feasibility ofoperating a floatplane from a destroyer during the fall of 1923with a twin- float Curtiss TS-1 fighter carried aboard a Clemsonclass four- stack destroyer, the USS Charles Ausburn (DD-294).While underway, the aircraft rested in a cradle forward of thebridge superstructure, then for air operations, was lowered intoand retrieved from the water with a small crane installed nearthe cradle. The forward stowage arrangement was found to se-riously restrict visibility from the bridge, plus efforts to handlethe aircraft on the narrow deck space available were hazardousat best, thus the after several months, experiments were dis-

continued. This same ship, incidentally, served as a guard shipstationed in the Atlantic for the Army’s 1924 around- the- worldflight attempt.

As international tensions arose in the late 1930s, theconcept was revived to address increasing concerns over pro-tecting merchant convoys from submarine or merchant raiderattacks. For convoys typically operating without cruiser or car-rier protection, floatplane scouts were seen as a significantmeans of expanding a destroyer’s radius of patrol. New exper-iments commenced in 1940 when another four- stack destroyer,the USS Noa (DD-343), was reconfigured to carry a CurtissSOC. To avoid the forward visibility problems experienced ear-lier, the aircraft’s nesting cradle was located rearward, just for-ward of the after deckhouse, and a boom used to launch andrecover the aircraft in the water. Although the SOC and asso-ciated aircraft equipment were removed from Noa after two


Tests were conducted in late 1923 with this TS-1 aboard the destroyer Noa (DD-294). The stowage arrangement was found to placesevere restrictions on visibility from the bridge.

months of experiments, test results were sufficiently promisingthat the Navy ordered Type A Mark IV compressed air catapultsto be installed aft of the funnels (in place of torpedo tubes) onsix Fletcher class destroyers then under construction (DD-476through -481), with the plan of equipping each ship with oneVought OS2U. All six went into service during 1942 and 1943with aircraft embarked but discontinued aviation operationslater in the war as greater numbers of escort carriers arrived toundertake the ASW function.

Gunboats. Though not actually designed to accommodatefloatplanes, Curtiss SOCs were nonetheless assigned togunboats USS Erie (PG-50) and Charleston (PG-51) soon aftertheir commissioning in mid–1936. Gunboats had been con -ceived as a loophole in the Washington Naval Treaty allowinga patrol vessel to carry 6-inch guns as long as it did not exceed2,000 tons displacement or a top speed of 20 knots. Their chiefrole was protecting U.S. interests abroad by “showing the flag”in foreign waters, with a secondary capability of convoy escort.

One aircraft could be carried in a cradle located aft of the singlefunnel on the port side and launched and retrieved via a hoistingboom. Both ships operated from the East Coast until late 1940,when Charleston was detached to the Pacific for patrol dutybetween Seattle and the Aleutian Islands and Erie stationed offCentral America to guard the western approaches to the PanamaCanal. In June 1942, while escorting a convoy between Guan-tanamo Bay, Cuba and Trinidad, Erie was sunk after being tor-pedoed by a German U- Boat. Charleston continued operationsin Alaskan waters during the war but ceased air operations in1943. The ship was decommissioned in 1946.

Coast Guard Cutters. Aircraft operating from the CoastGuard’s larger cutters and ice breakers at various times between1937 and 1945 included Grumman JF/J2F amphibians (see page205) and a float- equipped Waco J2W (see page 221). Thoughtwas given to the idea of installing catapults aboard the threeWind class icebreakers built between 1942 and 1944 but nevercarried out.


Appendix 1: Foreign Aircraft and Airships

299

Procurement Note. During World War I, due to the limitedcapabilities of the American aircraft industry, the Navy Departmenthad been obliged to procure sizable numbers of aircraft andairships from its European Allies in order to equip the Navy andMarine aviation units serving overseas. But soon after the warended, the U.S. government shifted to a general policy of requiringthe military services to procure new aircraft from American com-panies. Occasional exceptions to this policy, as seen below, werepermitted for practical reasons. Fifty foreign-built “turret fighters,”used as a temporary expedient on battleships from 1919 to 1922,were obtained from war surplus U.S. Army stocks. Another 20foreign types, sometimes in batches of two or three, were procuredbetween 1920 and 1930 purely for testing and evaluation of struc-tural methods. Several other foreign aircraft were also purchasedbetween 1927 and 1934 for the use of military air attachés in over-seas embassies.

Sopwith F.1 Camel (1918)

The Navy Department acquired six Army surplus, British-made Sopwith F.1 Camelfight ers in late 1918 toconduct the first experi-ments launching aircraftfrom wooden “flying-off ” platforms con-structed on the main tur-rets of a battleship,typically the No. 2 (for-ward) and No. 4 (aft).Dubbed “turret fighters,”these aircraft were in-tended to provide fleetair defense or functionas over-the-horizon gunspotters. For water land-ings, the aircraft wasfitted with two under-wing flotation bags anda hydro-vane, a deviceinstalled in front of thelanding gear axle thatwas designed to forestalla nose-over as the air-

craft contacted the water. A Camel made the first successful launchfrom the No. 2 turret of U.S.S. Texas (BB-35) in March 1919. Gen-eral specifications: type, single- seat fighter; one 130-hp Clerget 9Brotary engine; length, 18 ft. 9 in.; span, 26 ft. 11 in.; gross weight,1,455 lbs.; armament, two fixed Vickers .303-cal. machine guns;max. speed, 115 mph; ceiling, 21,000 ft.; range, 290 mi.

Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5a (1918)

A standard Royal Flying Corps fighter during the last twoyears of World War I, the British government transferred 38 SE.5asto the Army Air Service in 1918. Following the Armistice, severalsurplus examples acquired by the Navy Department were fitted-out as “turret fighters” with flotation bags and hydro-vanes to op-erate from the flying off platforms on battleships. Records indicatethat at least one S.E.5a served aboard New Mexico (BB-40) inmid–1919. General specifications: type, single-seat fighter; one200-hp Hispano-Suiza 8b inline engine; length, 20 ft. 11 in.; span,26 ft. 8 in.; gross weight, 2,058 lbs.; armament, one fixed .303-cal Vickers machine gun and one fixed .303-cal. Lewis machine

A surplus F.1 Camel at the Naval Aircraft Factory in 1919 being fitted with hydro-vane and flotation bags.

gun on a Foster mount; max. speed 123 mph; ceiling 17,000 ft.;range, 300 mi.

British Admiralty SSZ-23 Airship (1918)Although the Navy took delivery of six British non-rigid air-

ships during 1918, only one, SSZ-23 (Submarine Scout Zero–typeairship No. 23), was reported to have been operated in the U.S.after the war. This airship was deflated and shipped to NAS CapeMay, New Jersey in early 1919, where it was erected and flown as

a trainer until April. It was declared unfit and stricken in 1920.General specifications: type, three-place patrol airship; one 75-hpRolls-Royce Hawk inline engine; length, 142 ft.; diameter, 32 ft.;envelope volume, 70,000 cu. ft.; max. speed, 50 mph. (Note, a sec-ond British non-rigid airship operated by the Navy in 1918, thetwin-engine North Sea class NS-14, was received at NAS HamptonRoads in 1919, however, there is no record of it having ever beenflown.)

Hanriot HD.2C(1919)

Originally manufacturedby Hanriot in France duringWorld War I in both wheeled(HD.1) and twin-float (HD.2)fighter versions, 10 Army sur-plus HD.2s transferred to theNavy Department were de -livered to the Naval AircraftFactory in 1919 to be con -figured as “turret fighters,which entailed installation ofwheeled landing gear, flota-tion bags, and hydro-vanes.Following these modifica-tions, one HD.2 was em-barked aboard each battleshipin the Pacific Battle Fleetequipped with turret “flying-off ” platforms: New York(BB-34), Texas (BB-25), Ne-vada (BB-36), Oklahoma(BB-37), Pennsylvania (BB-38), Arizona (BB-39), NewMexico (BB-40), Idaho (BB-42), Tennessee (BB-43), andCalifornia (BB-44). Due tothe understandably high attri-tion rate of the water recoveryoperations, the HD.2s servedless than a year. General Spe -cifications: type, single-seatfighter; one 130-hp Clerget9B rotary engine; length, 23ft.; span, 27 ft. 11 in.; grossweight, 1,540 lbs.; armament,two fixed Vickers .303-cal.machine guns; max. speed,113 mph; ceiling, 15,750 ft.;range, 186 mi.

Nieuport 28 (1919)Twelve French-built,

Army surplus Nieuport 28fighters were reassigned tothe Navy Department in mid–

300 Appendix 1

Top: Several S.E.5as were transferred to the Navy from Army surplus stocks and fitted-out as “turretfighters.” Bottom: The airship SSZ-37 was in Royal Navy service and was identical to the six SubmarineScout types transferred to the U.S. Navy in 1918.

1919 to serve as replacement “turret fighters” for the Hanriot HD.2s.After being fitted with flotation bags and hydro-vanes, they beganentering service aboard battleships in the Pacific Battle Fleet during1920. At this juncture of operations, the platform-equipped battle-ships typically carried one Nieuport for fighter protection and oneSopwith Strutter (see below) as the gun spotter. All had been dam-aged beyond repair or withdrawn by the end of 1922. GeneralSpecifications: type, single-seat fighter; one 160-hp Gnome 9N ro-tary engine; length, 24 ft. 4 in.; span, 26 ft. 3 in.; gross weight,1,635 lbs.; armament, two fixed Vickers .303-cal. machine guns;max. speed, 122 mph; ceiling, 17,390 ft.; range, 180 mi.

Sopwith 11⁄2 Strutter (1919)

The British-designed Sopwith 11 ⁄2 Strutter was one of the most widely used Allied observation two-seaters during the lastyears of World War I. The 21 examples acquired in 1919 from sur-plus Army stocks probably comprised the final batch ofreplacement “turret fighters” and after being retrofitted with flo-tation bags and hydro-vanes, became the first shipboard typesequipped with two-way radios. By 1920, the usual aircraft com-plement aboard the turret platform-equipped battleships consistedof one radio-equipped Strutter for gun spotting and one Nieuport

Foreign Aircraft and Airships 301

Top: One of 10 HD-2Cs transferred from Army surplus stocks in 1919. All were equipped with hydro-vanes and flotation bags as bat-tleship “turret fighters.” Bottom: Twelve Army surplus Nieuport 28C.1s were transferred to the Navy in 1919 to replace the HD-2Csas “turret fighters.” The planes were withdrawn in 1922.

28 for air defense. With the advent of turntable catapults, all turretfighters were phased-out in favor of recoverable floatplanes during1922. General specifications: type, two-seat observation; one 130-hp Clerget 9B rotary engine; length, 25 ft. 3 in.; span, 33 ft. 6 in.;gross weight, 2,150 lbs.; armament, one fixed Vickers .303-cal.machine gun and one flexible Lewis .303-cal. machine gun in therear cockpit; max. speed, 100 mph; ceiling, 15,500 ft.; range, 300mi.

SCDA O-1 Airship (1919)Ordered by the Navy Department from the Italian firm Sta-

bilimento Consruzioni Dirigibili de Aerostati (SCDA) in January1919, O-1 was the only type of semi-rigid airship to ever serve withthe Navy. It was a typical Italian design of that era, having a rigidmetal keel that ran the length of the gas envelope and an open con-

trol car suspended by cables. After making its first flight in Italyin March 1919, O-1 was deflated and shipped initially to Akron,Ohio to be studied by Goodyear, then arrived at NAS Cape Mayin June. The airship was erected during the summer of 1919 andits first official Navy flight took place in September. O-1 remainedin operation until stricken in late 1921 or early 1922. General specifi-cations: type, three-place patrol airship; two 125-hp Colombo inlineengines; length, 177 ft. 10 in.; diameter, 35 ft. 5 in.; envelopevolume 127,000 cu. ft.; max. speed, 57 mph.

Parnall Panther (1920)The two-seat Panther, when ordered by the British Admiralty

in 1917, was among the very first aircraft to be designed specificallyfor carrier operations and did subsequently enter service in 1919aboard HMS Argus. However, the two examples purchased by the

Navy Department in 1920 received flo-tation bags and hydro-vanes for dutyaboard battleships equipped with “fly -ing-off ” platforms. Although the Pan-thers were delivered and given Navy se-rial numbers, there is no record of theirhaving actually been assigned to battle-ships. In any case, their arrival was prob-ably eclipsed by catapult developments.General Specifications: type, two-seatobservation; one 230-hp Bentley BR2rotary engine; length, 24 ft. 11 in.; span,29 ft. 6 in.; gross weight, 2,595 lbs., ar-mament, one flexible Lewis .303-cal.machine gun in the rear cockpit; max.speed 109 mph; ceiling, 14,500 ft.; range,480 mi.

302 Appendix 1

The Italian-made airship O-1 as seen in late 1919. It was the only type of “semi-rigid” airshipto be operated by the Navy.

One of the 21 Strutters acquired in 1919 to operate from battleships. It was the first type of spotter to be equipped with a radio.

Blackburn Mk.II Swift (BST-1) (1921)The Swift, flown in 1919, originated from a Royal Navy re-

quirement for a carrier-based torpedo plane. Two examples pur-chased by the Navy Department were received for testing and eval-uation in 1921. The type received the provisional designation BST-1(Blackburn Swift Torpedo), but no production was ordered. TheDart, an improved version of the Swift, was ultimately built inquantity for the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm. General spe ci -fications: type, single-seat torpedo plane; one 450-hp Napier LionIB inline engine; length, 35 ft. 6 in.; span, 45 ft. 6 in.; gross weight,

6,300 lbs.; armament, one 18-in. aerial torpedo on centerline; max.speed, 106 mph; ceiling, 15,000 ft.; range, 350 mi.

Dornier CsII Delphin (1921)Developed in Germany as a passenger-carrying civil flying

boat, the single CsII purchased by the Navy Department in 1921featured a one-foot extension to the cabin below the engine. Theaircraft had been acquired primarily to study its all-metal con-struction methods, and after delivery, was turned over to NAF forextensive flight testing and structural analyses. The test program


A very rare photograph of a Panther with flotation gear and hydro-vanes installed. Two were tested in 1920 but apparently neverdeployed aboard battleships.

One of two Swifts acquired in 1921 for torpedo plane tests, seen here after Navy markings had been applied.

apparently ended in 1922. General specifications: type, eight-placeflying boat transport; one 185-hp BMW IIIa inline engine; length,38 ft. 9 in.; span, 56 ft. 9 in.; gross weight, 4,850 lbs.; max. speed,93 mph; ceiling, 13,100 ft.; range, 236 mi.

Fokker D.VII (1921)The U.S. Army obtained 142 German Fokker D.VII fighters

after the Armistice with the intention of using them as advancedtrainers. When the D.VII first appeared over the Western Front in

mid–1918, it was arguably the most advanced operational fighterin the world. Innovative features included a steel tube fuselagestructure and cantilevered wings that dispensed with necessity ofdrag-inducing rigging wires. Six ex–Army D.VIIs were transferredto the Marines in 1921 and thereafter used as trainers at MCASQuantico until 1924. General specifications: type, single-seatfighter; one 180-hp Mercedes IIIa inline engine; length, 23 ft. 8in.; span, 34 ft. 10 in.; gross weight, 2,576 lbs.; armament (re-moved); max. speed, 116 mph; ceiling, 19,600 ft,; range, 400 mi.

304 Appendix 1

This Delphin was turned over to the Naval Aircraft Factory in 1921 for structural tests.

One of six ex–Army Fokker D.VIIs transferred to the Marines at MCAS Quantico in 1921 to be used as trainers.

Fokker C.I (1921)Too late to see combat, the C.I appeared at the close of World

War I as a slightly enlarged, two-seat reconnaissance version ofthe D.VII fighter. In 1921, after the Fokker company had moved itsoperations to Holland, the Navy Department purchased two C.Isand allocated them to the Marines as trainers at MCAS Quantico.They remained in service until 1924. General Specifications: type,two-seat observation; one 185-hp BMW IIIa inline engine; length,23 ft. 9 in.; span, 34 ft. 10 in.; gross weight, 2,767 lbs.; armament(removed); max. speed, 109 mph; ceiling, 13,125 ft.; range, 320 mi.

Junkers-Larsen JL-6 (1921)The New York–based Junkers-Larsen Aircraft Corp. was

formed in 1920 to assemble license-built copies of the highly in-novative Junkers F.13 transport for the purpose of marketing themto the Army, Navy, and Post Office. Flown in Germany for the firsttime in 1919, the F.13 was the world’s first all-metal airplane. ThreeAmerican-made examples, listed as the JL-6, were delivered tothe Navy in 1921 to be evaluated at NAS Anacostia in both wheeledand twin-float versions. No naval designations were apparentlyapplied. Larsen tried to interest the military services in a 400-hpLiberty powered variant, but no orders resulted. General specifi-cations: type, five-place transport; one 185-hp BMW IIIa inlineengine; length, 31 ft. 6 in; span, 48 ft. 7 in.; gross weight, 3,466lbs.; max. speed, 101 mph; ceiling, 16,600 ft.; range (not reported).


Marine Fokker C.1 seen while serving at MCAS Quantico. Two were used as trainers from 1921 to 1924.

A float-equipped JL-6 evaluated at NAS Anacostia during the summer of 1921. They were license-built Junkers F.13s.

Vickers Viking IV (1921)Developed too late for World War I, the Viking was the fore-

runner of the type of boat-hulled amphibians like the SupermarineSeagull and Walrus that would later see wide service aboard Britishwarships. The Navy Department procured one Viking IV for eval-uation purposes in 1921. The idea of using boat-hulled amphibianson Navy warships, specifically new Treaty Cruisers with seaplanehangars, was revived and tested again during the early 1930s withthe Great Lakes XSG-1, Loening XS2L-2, and Sikorsky XSS-1 butultimately rejected in favor of new floatplanes like the Curtis SOC-1. General specifications: type, four-place amphibian; one 450-hpNapier Lion inline engine; length, 34 ft. 2 in.; span, 50 ft.; grossweight, 5,790 lbs.; max. speed, 113 mph; ceiling (not reported);range, 925 mi.

Macchi M.16 (1922)The Italian-built M.16 was one of several very small floatplane

designs to be tested for the submarine scout role. Originally flownin 1919 as a wheeled sportplane, three float-equipped versions weredelivered to the Navy for trials in 1922. Since their airframes couldnot be readily disassembled for submarine stowage, the M.16s wereevidently intended for training. General specifications: type, sin-gle-seat floatplane; one 30-hp Anzani radial engine; length 14 ft.6 in.; span, 19 ft. 8 in.; gross weight, 572 lbs.; max. speed, 83 mph;ceiling (not reported); range, 200 mi.

306 Appendix 1

A single Viking amphibian was evaluated at NAS Anacostia during 1921 for potential shipboard use.

Three of these very small M.16 floatplanes were purchased in 1922 to be used for submarine scout training operations.

Heinkel-Caspar U.1 (1922)

Another diminutive submarine scout tested by the Navy in1922, the U.1, unlike the Macchi M.16, had been specifically de-signed to break-down and fit into the a stowage tube carried on asubmarine deck. Designed by Ernst Heinkel and built by the Cas-par-Werke firm in Germany, the all-wood U.1 featured a cantileverwing design that permitted rapid disassembly. Two examples or-dered for the Navy by BuAer arrived for flight trials in 1922 butappear not to have been used in actual exercises with submarine

S-1 that took place between 1923 and 1926. General specifications:type, single-seat floatplane; one 55-hp Siemens radial engine;length, 20 ft. 4 in.; span, 23 ft. 7 in.; gross weight, 1,124 lbs.; maxspeed, 93 mph; ceiling and range (not reported).

Handley Page Type S (HPS) (1923)The Type S (also known as the H.P. model 21) was built by

British aircraft manufacturer Handley Page to a specification issuedby the Navy Department in 1921 calling for a monoplane scout


The U.1 could be disassembled for submarine stowage. It was used in 1922 for operational training.

The two HPS-1 prototypes were built to U.S. Navy specifications but cancelled before delivery to the United States.

convertible to wheels or floats, with three prototypes subsequentlybeing ordered under the provisional designation HPS-1 (HandleyPage Scout). In addition to its monoplane layout, the HPS-1 in-cluded a fully cantilevered wing equipped with retractable lead-ing-edge slats and full-span trailing-edge flaps that were expectedto significantly reduce takeoff and landing speeds. However, flight-testing of the first prototype in England during the fall of 1923 re-vealed unacceptable handling characteristics. The secondprototype, featuring added wing dihedral, exhibited better flightcharacteristics when tested in early 1924 but was damaged beyondrepair when the landing gear collapsed during load trials. Soon af-terward, the Navy cancelled the contract for the third prototype.General specifications: type, single-seat scout; one 230-hp BentleyBR2 rotary engine; length, 21 ft. 6 in.; span, 29 ft. 3 in.; grossweight, 2,030 lbs.; max. speed 146 mph; ceiling, 21,000 ft.; range,330 mi.

Fokker FT-1 (1923)The FT-1 was derived from the T.III torpedo bomber built by

Fokker after the company relocated to Holland in 1919. It appearsto have been a low-wing, float-equipped variation of Fokker’s Lib-erty-powered F.IV monoplane design, two examples of which hadbeen sold to the Army in 1921 as the T-2. In 1923 the Navy acquiredthree T.IIIs under the designation FT-1 (Fokker Torpedo) and op-erated them out of NAS Hampton Roads for several years. Generalspecifications: type, three-place torpedo plane; one 400-hp liberty12 inline engine; length, 51 ft.; span, 65 ft.; gross weight, 7,300lbs.; max. speed, 104 mph; ceiling and range (not reported).

Dornier (Wright) WP-1 (1923)

The Dornier D.1 Falke, built in Switzerland and flown for thefirst time in 1922, emerged as an innovative monoplane fighter de-sign featuring an all-metal, aluminum-clad structure. One D.1 air-

308 Appendix 1

Top: An FT-1 in flight near NAS Hampton Roads. Three operated from 1923 to 1927 as shore-based torpedo planes. Bottom: The soleWP-1 is seen at NAS Anacostia in 1923 while being evaluated as a potential carrier fighter.

frame was shipped to Wright Aeronautical Corp. in 1923 tobe fitted with a 320-hp Wright E-3 engine and entered inthe Navy carrier fighter competition later the same year.After completing the engine installation, Wright deliveredthe aircraft to NAS Anacostia where it was assigned thenaval designation WP-1 (Wright Pursuit). Although the WP-1 prototype exhibited above-average performance duringflight trials, naval officials remained skeptical about the han-dling characteristics of monoplanes, and furtherdevelopment was discontinued. General specifications: type,single-seat fighter; one 320-hp Wright H-3 inline engine;length, 24 ft. 4 in.; span, 32 ft. 10 in.; gross weight, 2,674lbs.; max. speed, 162 mph; ceiling (not reported); range, 217mi.

De Havilland DH.60 Moth (1927)Introduced in 1925, the DH.60 Moth became one of

the most popular club and training aircraft in Britain. TheNavy bought a single example in 1927, designated XDH-60, for the use of the Naval Air Attaché at the AmericanEmbassy in London. General specifications: type, two-seattrainer; one 60-hp Cirrus inline engine; length 24 ft. 11 in.;span, 30 ft.; gross weight, 1,649 lbs.; max. speed, 102 mph;ceiling, 14,500 ft.; range, 320 mi.

OFM Ro.1 (1928)Produced in Italy by Officine Ferroviarie Meridionali

(OFM), the Ro.1 was a license-built copy of the Dutch-de-signed Fokker C.V two-seat military observation and lightattack aircraft, which had been flown for the first time in1924. Italian-made Ro.1s began entering service with theAviation Corps of the Regio Esercito (Italian Army) in 1927.The Navy purchased one Ro.1 in 1928 for the use of theNaval Air Attaché in Rome. General specifications: type,two-seat observation and light attack; on 450-hp BristolJupiter VI radial engine; length, 31 ft. 2 in.; span, 50 ft. 2in.; gross weight, 4,909 lbs.; max. speed, 132 mph; ceiling,19,360 ft.; range, 6721 mi.

Bristol Bulldog IIa (1929)The Bristol Bulldog served as a frontline fighter with

the Royal Air Force and several foreign nations from 1929until the mid–1930s. BuAer purchased one Bulldog IIa, themain production version, for evaluation purposes in late1929, but after it was destroyed on its first flight, a secondaircraft was acquired in April 1930 to replace it. Reputedto be highly maneuverable, the Bulldog delivered perform-ance comparable to the Navy’s contemporaneous BoeingF4B-1 and was similar in structure. General specifications:type, single-seat fighter; one 440-hp Bristol Jupiter II radialengine; length, 25 ft. 2 in.; span, 33 ft. 10 in.; gross weight,3,490 lbs.; armament, two Vickers .303-cal. machine gunsand 80 lbs. of bombs on external racks; max. speed, 174mph; ceiling, 27,000 ft.; range, 275 mi.


Top: The American-registered DH.60, identical to the XDH-60 flown byNaval Air Attaché in London between 1927 and 1934. Middle: Formationof OFM (IMAM) Ro.1s in Regia Aeronautica service seen over the Alpsduring the early 1930s. Bottom: The second Bulldog was tested at NASAnacostia in 1930 after the first had been destroyed the previous year.

De Havilland DH.80 Puss Moth (1934)A fabric-covered monoplane first flown in 1929, the DH.80

Puss Moth gained popularity in Britain as a civilian sportplane,selling over 250 examples by the time production ceased in late1933. The Navy purchased one DH.80 in 1934 to replace the DH.60(see above) being used by the Naval Air Attaché in London. Theaircraft was listed on the inventory as the XDH-80 until late 1939,at which time it was impressed into service by the Royal Air Force.General specifications: type, three-place civil sportplane; one 120-hp Gypsy III inline engine; length, 25 ft.; span, 36 ft. 9 in.; gross

weight, 2,050 lbs.; max. speed, 128 mph; ceiling, 17,500 ft.; range,300 mi.

Caudron C.635 Simoun (1938)An elegant French design, the first Caudron C.500 Simoun

flew in 1934 as a four-seat civil touring and sport plane. A seriesof improvements and an engine upgrade resulted in theintroduction of the model C.635 during the late 1930s, with onebeing acquired by the Navy for the use of the Naval Air Attachéin Paris in either 1938 or 1939. Though not documented in any ref-

310 Appendix 1

American-registered DH.80 of the same type used as that by the Naval Air Attaché in London from 1934 to 1939.

An example of C-635 preserved at the Musee de l’Air in Paris. A similar aircraft was flown by the Naval Air Attaché in Paris in 1938and 1939.

erence, this aircraft was thought to have been impoundedby the German Nazi government following the U.S. dec-laration of war December 1941. General specifications:type, four-place civil sportplane; one 220-hp Renault 6Q-09 Bengali inline engine; length, 29 ft. 10 in.; span, 34 ft.2 in.; gross weight, 3,040 lbs.; max. speed, 190 mph;ceiling, 20,000 ft.; range, 930 mi.

Messerschmitt Bf.108b TaifunA direct predecessor of the Bf.109 fighter, the Bay-

erische Flugzeugwerke introduced the Willi Messer-schmitt–designed Bf.108 Taifun (Typhoon) as the M-37four-seat sportplane in 1934. The most numerous variant,the Bf.108b, appeared in 1935 with an uprated Argus As10C engine and small aerodynamic improvements. A singleBf.108b was purchased by U.S. government in the springof 1939 for the use of the Military Air Attachés in theAmerican embassy in Berlin. Though flown by both Army andNavy Air Attachés, the aircraft was entered on the Army inventoryas the XC-44. Historical records indicate that the Bf.108b had beengrounded by embassy officials a month before being seized by the

German government in December 1941. General specifications:type, four-place civil sportplane; one 240-hp Argus As 10C inlineengine; length, 27 ft. 2 in.; span, 34 ft. 5 in.; gross weight, 2,976lbs.; max. speed, 190 mph; ceiling, 20,300 ft.; range, 620 mi.


A civil-registered Bf.108b of the type used by the Naval Air Attaché inBerlin from 1939 to 1941. The swastika was required by German law.

Appendix 2: Racing and Experimental Aircraft

312

Historical Note. Official Navy Department policy toward airracing and record-setting underwent several variations during the1920s. From 1921 to 1926, the Navy was directly involved to theextent of procuring specialized racing aircraft and using NavalAviators to fly them, actively competing in the Pulitzer Trophy,Curtiss Marine Trophy, and Schneider Maritime Cup races heldduring that time. Then in 1926, the Secretary of the Navy, CurtisWilbur, informed Admiral Moffett of the Naval Bureau of Aero-nautics (BuAer) that the Navy Department was opposed to “directinvolvement” in air racing. But the application of this supposedban after 1926 was far from uniform. From 1927 to 1930, the NavalAircraft Factory, under BuAer’s direction, collaborated with theMercury Flying Corp. in the construction and development of theMercury floatplane racer, with the understanding that the aircraftwould be flown by a Marine pilot (i.e., Lt. Alfred J. Williams, whofunctioned as an advisor to Moffett); however, in 1930 the NavyDepartment intervened to prevent further Navy involvement in theproject, and the completed racer never flew. Likewise, in an ap-parent departure from official policy, float-equipped Navy CurtissF6C-3s flown by Marine pilots competed in and won the CurtissMarine Trophy Race in 1928 and 1930, and a modified F6C-3 withwheels was flown to fourth place by a Navy pilot in the 1929 Na-

tional Air Race at Cleveland. Another collaborative effort, thistime between BuAer and the Curtiss factory in 1930, resulted indevelopment of the highly modified XF6C-6 monoplane racer.This aircraft, flown by Marine pilot Capt. Arthur Page, crashed atthe National Air Races in 1930, after which Navy involvement inracing ceased altogether.

Curtiss 18-T (1918)Originally ordered as a two-seat fighter, the two 18-T triplanes

delivered in mid–1918 were subsequently used to capture aviationrecords and for racing. In August 1918, one Navy 18-T set a newworld’s speed record of 163 mph for an aircraft carrying a militaryload, then in September 1919, the other 18-T, fitted with longerwings, established a world altitude record of 34,610 feet. Both air-craft, fitted with short wings and floats, competed in the CurtissMarine Trophy Race in 1922, though neither finished. General speci -fications: type, two-seat racer; one 400-hp Kirkham-Curtiss V12inline engine; length, 23 ft. 4 in.; span, 31 ft. 10 in., gross weight,3,050 lbs.; max speed, 160 mph; ceiling, 23,000 ft., range (not re-ported.)

A Curtiss 18-T with short wings and floats. Both 18Ts competed in the Curtiss Marine Trophy Race in 1922.

Curtiss CR (1921)

Curtiss received a Navy contract in June 1921 to design andbuilt two aircraft as official Navy entries in the upcoming PulitzerTrophy race scheduled later the same year. Designated CR-1 and-2 (Curtiss Racer), the design was characterized by an aerodynam-ically clean molded plywood fuselage and thin-section, fabric-cov-ered wooden wings, and could be converted to wheels or floats de-pending on the racing format. The CRs were not entered in any1921 races but a factory test pilot flew one to set a new world’s ab-solute speed of 197.8 mph later in the year. As Navy contestants,CR-1 and -2, rigged with wheels, placed third and fourth in the

1922 Pulitzer Trophy race, and rigged with floats and wing surfaceradiators and re-designated CR-3 and -4, won first and secondplaces in the 1923 Schneider Maritime Cup race. CR-4 set a closedcourse speed record of 188 mph in 1924. General specifications(CR-3): type, single-seat floatplane racer; 405-hp Curtiss CD-12inline engine; length, 25 ft.; span 22 ft. 8 in.; gross weight, 2,746lbs.; max speed, 177 mph; ceiling, 19,200 ft.; range, 522 mi.

Wright NW (1922)Wright Aeronautical Corp. received a contract in 1922 to build

two racing aircraft according to plans and specifications issued by

Racing and Experimental Aircraft 313

The CR-1 in mid–1921 with Lamblin-type radiators fitted. This aircraft established a new world speed record of 197.8 mph.

The NW-1 as seen in October 1922 with sesquiplane wing incorporated into the landing gear struts. It was forced to ditch in a lakeduring the Pulitzer race.

BuAer. The first design, known as the Navy-Wright racer or NW-1, featured an unusual mid-wing layout with a small sesquiplanewing mounted on the landing gear legs. NW-1 made its first flightin October 1922 only a few days before being entered in the PulitzerTrophy race. During the race, NW-1 reached a top speed of 186mph but irreparably damaged when the pilot was forced to ditch

in a lake due to engine overheating. The second prototype, desig-nated NW-2, appeared in 1923 as conventional biplane mountedon twin floats to compete in the Schneider Maritime Cup race. Inflight trials prior to the race, NW-2 crash-landed and sank aftersuffering an in-flight propeller failure. General specifications (NW-1): type, single-seat racer; one 525-hp Wright T-2 inline en-

gine; length, 24 ft.; span, 30 ft. 6 in.;gross weight, 3,000 lbs.; max. speed,186 mph; ceiling (not reported);range, 300 mi.

Bee Line (Booth) BR(1922)

Designed by Harry T. Boothand constructed by Aerial Engineer-ing Corp., two aircraft listed as BeeLine BR-1 and -2 (Booth Racer)were built for the Navy in 1922 tocompete in the Pulitzer Trophy race.Both aircraft were low-wing mono-planes rigged with wheels, BR-1having pod-type Lamblin radiatorsand BR-2, wing skin types. No flightor race records on these aircraft ap-pear to exist. General specifications:type, single-seat racer; one 390-hpWright H-3 inline engine; length 21ft. 5 in.; span, 28 ft. 1 in.; grossweight, 2,056 lbs., max speed, 188mph.

Naval Aircraft FactoryTR (1922)

Intended to compete in a forth-coming Curtiss Marine Trophy race,a float-equipped NAF-built TS-3fighter underwent modifications atNAF in 1922 that included installa-tion of a 180-hp Wright-Hispano en-gine and streamlining improve -ments. After being tested as theTR-3, the aircraft entered the racebut made a forced landing beforefinishing. The same aircraft, rebuiltin 1923, emerged as the TR-3A witha larger Wright engine, revised cowl-ing, and flush wing radiators. Afterrecurring engine problems preventedthe TR-3A from entering the 1923Schneider Maritime Cup, further de-velopment was abandoned. Generalspecifications: type, single-seat racer(TR-3A); one 275-hp Wright E-4 in-line engine; length, 21 ft. 6 in.; span,

314 Appendix 2

The float-equipped NW-2 in 1923 with biplane layout and wing-skin radiators. It did not com-pete.

The BR-1 in 1922 with Lamblin-type radiators; the BR-2 had wing-skin type radiators. Bothwere built to compete in the Pulitzer race.

25 ft.; gross weight, 2,129 lbs.; max. speed, 159 mph; ceiling 20,700ft.; range (not reported).

Wright F2W (1923)Very similar in design and construction to the Curtiss CRs,

Wright Aeronautical Corp. built two biplane racers for the Navy


Modified from a TS-2, the TR-3A was designed to enter the 1923 Schneider Cup Race in England but did not compete.

The float-equipped F2W-2 appeared in 1924 with new wings and a Wright T-2 engine but crashed before it could compete.

in 1923 under the fighter designation F2W-1 to compete in the 1923Pulitzer Trophy race. F2W-1 A6743 took third place at a speed of230 mph but A6744 crash-landed before finishing. A6744, riggedwith floats as F2W-2, was destroyed in a 1924 crash before it couldcompete in any race. General specifications: type, single-seat racer;one 780-hp Wright Tornado inline engine; length 21 ft. 4 in.; span,22 ft. 6 in.; gross weight, 2,858 lbs.; max. speed, 240 mph.

Curtiss R2C and R3C (1923)Developed from the earlier CRs, two R2C-1s were built for

the Navy by Curtiss to compete in national air races scheduledduring 1923. They differed from the CRs in having boostedengines, better streamlining, and upper wings mounted directly tothe fuselage. R2C-1 A6692 took first place in the 1923 Pulitzerrace with a speed of 243.7 mph, while A6691 took second at 241.8mph. A6692 became the R2C-2 when converted to floats in 1924

316 Appendix 2

Top: The R2C-2 A-6692 is seen rigged with floats in 1924. As a wheeled R2C-1 the previous year, this aircraft won the Pulitzer racewith a speed of 243.7 mph. Bottom: This float-equipped R3C-2 competed in but did not finish the 1925 Schneider Cup Race. LieutenantJ. H. Doolittle won the race in an Army R3C-2.

but was never raced, and A6691 was sold to the Army the sameyear. A6692 crashed in 1926 while being used to train pilots for aforthcoming Schneider Maritime Cup race. Three R3Cs (A6978,A6979, and A7054) appeared in 1925 and 1926 with more powerfulengines and different airfoil sections. A6978, as an R3C-1 riggedwith wheels, won the 1925 Pulitzer race at a speed of 249 mph.A6978 and A6979, as R3C-2s with floats, competed in the 1925Schneider race but did not finish. In 1926, A7045 as an R3C-2,placed second in the Schneider race and A6979, as the R3C-4 withdifferent engine, did not finish. General specifications (R3C-2):type, single-seat floatplane racer; one 565-hp Curtiss V1400 inlineengine; length, 22 ft.; span 22 ft.; gross weight, 2,738 lbs.; max.speed, 245 mph; ceiling, 21,200 ft.; range, 290 mi.

Longren Fibre Sport Plane (1924)Originally flown in 1921 as the Longren AK or “Fibre Sport

Plane,” BuAer reportedly acquired three of these aircraft in 1924solely to study the constructionmethods used. The fuselage wasmolded from a wood fiber laminateand the folding wings, made ofwood, featured a truss system thatdispensed with rigging wires. Notest results were reported. Accord-ing to one source, designer A. K.Longren filed for bankruptcy in1924. General speci fications: type,two-seat sportplane; one 60-hpLawrance L-4 radial engine; length,19 ft. 7 in.; span, 27 ft. 11 in.; grossweight, 1,195 lbs.; max speed, 87mph; ceiling, 9,050 ft.; range (notreported).

Naval Aircraft FactoryNM (1924)

Built and designed by theNaval Aircraft Factory, the NM-1(Navy-Metal) appeared in 1924 as aflying testbed for metal structuraltechniques. If successful, BuAercontemplated producing the designas a Marine armed observation typethat would replace the older O2Bs.Fuselage construction used theDornier method of beaded alu-minum skins riveted to stampedmetal bulkheads; metal-framedwings and tail group were skinnedfrom smooth duraluminum sheets.Development was discontinued in1925 after testing revealed seriousstructural fatigue in the fuselage.General specifications: type, two-seat experimental; one 325-hp

Packard 1A-1237 inline engine; length, 31 ft.; span, 42 ft.; grossweight, 4,190 lbs.; max. speed 108 mph; ceiling 16,900 ft.; range(not reported).

Naval Aircraft Factory Mercury Racer(1928)

Aimed at winning the Schneider Maritime Cup race, the Mer-cury Racer represented a joint venture between BuAer andMercury Flying Corp. No bureau number was ever assigned to it.The design emerged as a mid-wing monoplane with a molded,semi-monocoque wooden fuselage. Power was derived from two500-hp Packard engines arranged in series that occupied nearlyhalf the length of the fuselage. Taxi tests carried out during 1929revealed serious engine gearing and overheating problems that de-layed flight-testing. Interestingly, the project was apparently en-joined by the Navy Department in 1930 before the aircraft couldbe made ready to fly. General specifications (none available).


Top: The Bureau of Aeronautics acquired three Fibre Sport Planes in 1924 to study the con-struction methods used. Bottom: Pictured in 1924, the NM-1 was built to test various aluminumstructural methods. Development discontinued in 1925.

Curtiss F6C Page Racer (1930)

Popularly known as the “Page Racer,” the XF6C-6 was des-tined to be last of the Navy racers. It was the brainchild of Marineracing pilot Capt. Arthur Page, who in the spring of 1930 had flowna modified F6C-3 to victory in the Curtiss Marine Trophy race.With the objective of winning the Thompson Trophy racescheduled in September, Page persuaded BuAer officials to au-thorize an extensive series of modifications to be performed on anF6C-3 at the Curtiss factory. Changes to the basic airframeincluded replacing the biplane layout with a parasol-mounted

monoplane wing, plus installation of a boosted Curtiss V1570 Con-queror engine and P-6E–type cantilevered landing gear. The re-sulting XF6C-3 was expected to reach speeds up to 250 mph. Pagewas leading the race in the 17th lap when the aircraft inexplicablywandered out of the circuit and crashed into the ground. Page laterdied from injuries. An investigation of the crash revealed that hehad lost consciousness after being overcome with carbon monoxidefumes. General specifications: type, single-seat racer; one 750-hpCurtiss Conqueror inline engine; length, 22 ft. 10 in.; span, 31 ft.10 in; gross weight (not reported); performance details (not re-ported).

318 Appendix 2

Top: The Mercury Racer as seen in 1929. Its two 500-hp Packard engines were arranged in series. It was never flown. Bottom: Knownas the Page Racer, the highly modified XF6C-6 ended all Navy racing when it crashed in 1930, killing Marine pilot Captain ArthurPage.

Appendix 3: Naval Aircraft, Airship,Ship, and Aviation Unit Designations,

Nomenclature, and Abbreviations

319

Aircraft

From 1917 to 1922, aircraft were procured and identified underthe manufacturer’s name and model number as with the CurtissH-16 and MF and Aeromarine 39-B. In March 1922, the recentlyformed Naval Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) adopted a standard-ized designation system utilizing a combination of letters and num-bers to identify naval aircraft. Initially, the system was sequencedin order of manufacturer, model, type, and production version,e.g., M2O-1 translated to M = Martin, 2 = second Model, O = ob-servation type, and 1 = first version. Then in 1923 the designationorder was revised in order of type, model, manufacturer, and pro-duction version, e.g., F4B-4 translated to F = fighter type, 4 =fourth version, B = Boeing, and -4 = fourth production version,and with minor variations, this system would remain in effect until1962. Foreign aircraft (see Appendix 1) sometimes retained theirforeign designations as with the Bristol Bulldog IIa and OFM Ro.1while others received non-standard designations as with the Han-dley Page HPS-1 and De Havilland XDH80. An “X” prefix aheadof the type designation generally denoted experimental prototypestatus but was occasionally applied to off-the-shelf civil aircraftacquired for utility or transportation purposes. A letter suffix some-times added to the production model number indicated specialequipment or a modification, e.g., the Grumman J2F-2A identifieda Marine version to which machine guns and bomb racks had beenadded. The following alphabetical codes under the 1922 systemapply to aircraft appearing in this book:

Type Designations Example Dates Used

B = Bomber BG-1 1929–1940BF = Bomber-Fighter BFC-1 1934–1937F = Fighter F3F-2 1925–1962G = Transport, Single-Engine GB-1 1939–1946H = Air Ambulance XHL-1 1929–1931J = Transport JR-2 1929–1931J = Utility J2F-2 1931–1962JR = Utility Transport JRS-1 1935–1946LN = Glider Trainer LNS-1 1941–1946M = Marine Expeditionary EM-1 1922–1923N = Trainer (Primary after 1939) N3N-3 1922–1962

O = Observation O3U-3 1922–1935OS = Observation-Scout (BB) OS2U-1 1935–1946P = Patrol P2Y-1 1922–1962PB = Patrol-Bomber PBY-1 1935–1946PBT = Patrol-Bomber-Torpedo XPBTH-1 1934–1937R = Racer R3C-2 1922–1926R = Transport R2D-1 1931–1962S = Scout SU-1 1922–1935SB = Scout–Bomber SBC-3 1935–1946SN = Advanced Trainer SNJ-2 1939–1962SO = Scout–Observation (CA, CL) SOC-3 1934–1946T = Torpedo Plane T4M-1 1922–1935T = Transport TA-1 1926 –1930TB = Torpedo-Bomber TBD-1 1935–1946

Manufacturer Designations Dates Used

A = Aeromarine Plane & Motor Co. 1922A = Atlantic Aircraft Corp. (Fokker) 1926 –1931A = Brewster Aeronautical Corp. 1935–1945A = General Aviation Manufacturing Corp. (Fokker) 1931–1932B = Beech Aircraft Co. 1937–1962B = Boeing Airplane Co. 1923–1946C = Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co. 1922–1929C = Curtiss-Wright Aeronautical Corp. 1929–1946D = Douglas Aircraft Corp. 1922–1962E = Bellanca Aircraft Corp. 1931–1937E = G. Elias and Brother, Inc. 1922–1924F = Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. 1931–1962G = Eberhart Aeroplane & Motor Co. 1927–1928G = Great Lakes Aircraft Corp. 1929–1936H = Hall Aluminum Aircraft Corp. 1928–1940H = Howard Aircraft Co. 1941–1946H = Huff-Daland Airplane Co. 1922–1925H = Stearman-Hammond Co. 1937–1938J = Berliner-Joyce Co. 1929–1935J = General Aviation Manufacturing Corp. (Fokker) 1932–1933J = North American Aviation, Inc. 1937–1962K = Fairchild Airplane & Engine Corp. 1936 –1946K = Keystone Aircraft Corp. 1929–1931K = Kinner Airplane & Motor Co. 1936L = Bell Aircraft Corp. 1941–1942

Manufacturer Designations Dates Used

L = Loening Aeronautical Engineering Co. 1923–1928L = Loening Aeronautical Div., Keystone Aircraft

Corp. 1929–1933M = Glenn L. Martin Co. 1922–1962N = Naval Aircraft Factory 1922–1946O = Lockheed Aircraft Corp. 1931–1942O = Viking Flying Boat Co. (Stearman-Varney) 1931–1936P = Pitcairn-Cierva Autogyro Co. 1931–1936P = Mid-Continent Div. of Spartan Aircraft Co. 1940–1942Q = Fairchild Aircraft Manufacturing Co. 1928Q = Stinson Aircraft Corp. 1934–1935R = Stout Metal Airplane Div. of Ford Motor Co. 1928–1930R = Ryan Aeronautical Co. 1941S = Schweizer Aircraft Corp. 1941–1942S = Sikorsky Manufacturing Co. 1927–1929S = Sikorsky Aviation Div. of United Aircraft, Inc. 1929–1962S = Stearman Aircraft Div. of Boeing Airplane Co. 1935–1945S = Stout Metal Airplane Co. 1922T = Standard Aircraft Corp. 1930–1934T = Northrop Corp. 1933–1937U = Chance Vought Corp. 1922–1929U = Chance Vought Div. of United Aircraft, Inc. 1929–1962V = Vultee Aircraft, Inc. 1940–1945W = Waco Aircraft Co. 1934–1939W = Wright Aeronautical Corp. 1922–1926Y = Consolidated Aircraft Corp. (later Convair) 1925–1962Z = Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate Ltd. 1934

AirshipsRigid Airships (Dirigibles). The five large rigid airships op-

erated by the Navy from 1921 to 1935 all used alpha-numeric des-ignations common to naval ships rather than aircraft. The letter“Z” denoted lighter-than-air and “R” indicated rigid, as withShenandoah (ZR-1), the unnamed R.38 (ZR-2), and Los Angeles(ZR-3), and “S” for scout was added to Akron (ZRS-4) and Macon(ZRS-5). A one-of-a-kind designation was applied to the smallerZMC-2, which translated as Z = lighter-than-air, MC = metal-clad,and -2 = second series.

Non-Rigid Airships (Blimps). From 1917 until 1941, non-rigidairships used a simple alpha-numeric that identified them by class(B through O), followed by the envelope number of the class, asfollows:

Class and Number Number Accepted Dates Served

A (not used) - -B-1 through -20 17 (+3 rebuilt) 1917–1924C-1 through -10 10 1918–1922D-1 through -6 5 (D-1 destroyed before

delivery) 1920–1921E-1 1 1918–1924F-1 1 1919–1923G-1 (ZNG) 1 (7 accepted after 1941) 1935–1959H-1 1 1922J-1 and -2 1 (J-2 cancelled) 1922–1924J-3 and -4 2 (used Army TC-type

envelopes) 1925–1940K-1 1 1931–1940

K-2 through -5 (ZPK) 4 (128 accepted after 1941) 1941–1959L-1 through -3 (ZNL) 3 (19 accepted after 1941) 1938–1946O-1 (see Appendix 1) 1 (Italian-made, semi-rigid) 1919–1921TC-13 and -14 2 (transferred from Army) 1938–1945

In 1941, with the exception of TC-13 and -14, BuAer adopteda new alpha-numeric system that added Z (lighter-than-air) and N(trainer) or P (patrol) to the existing class codes, as shown abovein parentheses.

Aviation-Related ShipsIn 1919 the Navy Department adopted a standardized alpha-

nu meric designation system for all commissioned ships consistingof a two or three-letter hull type followed by the hull number. Avi-ation-related ships covered in this book may be identified as fol-lows:

Hull Description Dates UsedType

AC = Coal Collier assigned to aviation 1925–1930AM = Minesweeper assigned to aviation 1919–1936AO = Fleet Oiler assigned to aviation 1924–1935AV = Heavy Seaplane Tender 1925–1960AVD = Small Seaplane Tender, Destroyer 1940–1945AVG = Auxiliary Aircraft Carrier (later ACV

and CVE) 1941–1942AVP = Small Seaplane Tender 1936 –1966AZ = Airship Tender 1921–1925BB = Battleship 1919–1991CA = Armored Cruiser; Heavy Cruiser after 1931 1919–1975CL = Light Cruiser 1920–1962CLV = Flying Deck Cruiser (not built) -CM = Minelayer assigned to aviation 1919–1931CV = Fleet Aircraft Carrier 1922–1952DD = Destroyer assigned to aviation 1920–1921DD = Destroyer equipped with floatplane 1923–1944PG = Gunboat equipped with floatplane 1936 –1943SS = Submarine 1923–1975WPG = Coast Guard Cutter equipped with

amphibian 1937–1945

Aviation Unit Organization andDesignations

Squadrons formed the basic organizational component forboth Navy and Marine Corps aviation units from World War Ithroughout the interwar period and afterward. A standard alpha-numeric classification system for Navy squadrons was adopted in1922, and a similar system was applied to Marine Corps units in1924. Using a scheme analogous to aircraft and airships, squadronswere identified by two letters denoting the aviation class and typeof mission followed by a squadron number. The prefix “V” indi-cated heavier-than-air class (aircraft) and “Z,” lighter-than-air (air-ships).

Prefix Mission Dates Used

VA Training Squadron 1922VB Bombing Squadron 1922–1946

320 Appendix 3

Prefix Mission Dates Used

VF Fighting Squadron 1922–presentVG Fleet or Utility Squadron 1922VJ Utility Squadron 1923–1962VO Observation Squadron 1922–1945VN Training Squadron 1923–1947VNL Glider Training Squadron 1941–1943VP Patrol Squadron 1922–presentVS Scouting Squadron 1922–1947VMSB Marine Scout–Bomber Squadron 1941–1947VCS Cruiser-Scouting Squadron 1936 –1949VT Torpedo Squadron 1922–1946VMTB Marine Torpedo-Bomber Squadron 1941–1947VX Experimental Squadron 1927–presentZJ Blimp Utility Squadron 1941–1961ZN Blimp Training Squadron 1941–1961ZP Blimp Patrol Squadron 1941–1961

From 1926, a suffix letter or letters and numbers were addedto the squadron number to indicate assignment and/or location.For squadrons assigned to ships, the fleet, and the Marines, thepractice was discontinued in 1937. The “M” for Marine Corps as-signment after that time became part of the prefix as with VMB-1, VMF-1, etc.

Suffix Assignment/Location Dates Used

B Battle Fleet (e.g., VF-6B) 1926 –1937D + number Naval District (e.g., VJ-5D11) 1926 –1942F Fleet (e.g., VP-10F) 1926 –1937M Marine Corps (e.g., VO-7M) 1926 –1937R Reserve Squadron (e.g., VS-12R) 1928–1942S Scouting Fleet (e.g., VS-10S) 1926 –1937

During 1926 and 1927, Navy squadrons assigned to the fleetwere organized into carrier air groups, battleship divisions, andcruiser divisions. Carrier air groups (CVGs) were simply identifiedby ship name (e.g., Lexington Air Group or CVG) but after 1942by carrier hull number (e.g., CVG-9, etc.). In 1937 carrier airgroups were further assigned to one of two carrier divisions andpatrol squadrons organized into five patrol wings. Marinesquadrons were generally grouped by coast location (e.g., FirstAviation Group, San Diego 1925-1926; East Coast ExpeditionaryForce, Quantico, 1927-1934; and Fleet Marine Force [FMF], Air -

craft Two, San Diego 1935-1941). Starting in 1941, Marine Squad -rons were further organized into Marine Air Wings (e.g., 1st MAW)and Marine Air Groups (e.g., MAG-21). Until 1942, Coast Guardaircraft were individually assigned by air station (e.g., CGAS Eliz-abeth City, New Jersey) or by Naval District (e.g., 7th NavalDistrict, Miami, Florida). After 1942, newly organized Coast Guardsquadrons were identified by the suffix “CG” (e.g., VP-6CG).

Naval Aviation AbbreviationsACTG Advanced Carrier Training GroupBuAer Naval Bureau of AeronauticsBuNo Aircraft or Airship Bureau NumberBuShips Naval Bureau of ShipsBuWeps Naval Bureau of WeaponsBAD Marine Corps Base Air DetachmentBatFor Battle Force Aircraft PoolCGAS Coast Guard Air StationCVG Carrier Air GroupFAPU Fleet Air Photographic UnitFMF Fleet Marine ForceLANT Atlantic FleetLSO Landing Signals OfficerLTA Lighter-Than-AirMAG Marine Air GroupMAW Marine Air WingMCAS Marine Corps Air StationNA Naval Academy, Annapolis, MarylandNAD Naval Air DetachmentNACA National Advisory Committee for AeronauticsNAF Naval Aircraft Factory, Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaNAP Naval Aviation Pilot, EnlistedNAAS Naval Auxiliary Air StationNAS Naval Air StationNOB Naval Operating BaseNPG Naval Proving Ground, Dahlgren, VirginiaNRAB Naval Reserve Air BaseNTS Naval Torpedo Station, Newport, Rhode IslandPAC Pacific FleetSS Service SquadronTTS Transitional Training SquadronTTU Transitional Training Unit

Naval Aircraft, Airship, Ship, and Aviation Unit Designations, Nomenclature, and Abbreviations 321

Appendix 4: Status of NavalAviation, December 1941

322

U.S. Navy Aircraft and Airships

Manufacturer/Designation Inventory Assigned toCombat Units

Attack Aircraft:Douglas BD-1 1 0Great Lakes BG-1 22 0Northrop BT-1 and -2 39 0Brewster XSBA-1/NAF SBN-1 22 7Curtiss SBC-3 and–4 174 39Douglas SBD-1, -2, and -3 242 191Vought SBU-1 and -2 86 0Vought SB2U-1, -2, and -3 94 63Martin T4M-1/Great Lakes TG-1 and -2 7 0Douglas TBD-1 101 75Grumman XTBF-1 1 0

Totals 789 375(Note, acceptance of Brewster XSB2A-1, Curtiss XSB2C-1,

and Vought XTBU-1 prototypes pending)

Fighter Aircraft:Brewster F2A-1, -2, and -3 144 28Boeing F4B-3 and -4 34 0Grumman FF-2 7 0Grumman F2F-1 23 0Grumman F3F-1, -2, and -3 117 0Grumman F4F-3, -4, -5, and -6 185 146Grumman XF5F-1 1 0Bell XFL-1 1 0Vought XF4U-1 1 0

Totals 511 174

Observation/Scout Aircraft:Vought O3U-1, -2, and -6 74 0NAF XOSN-1 1 0Vought OS2U-1, -2, and -3 536 79Grumman SF-1 11 0Vought SU-1, -2, -3, and -4 67 1Curtiss SOC-1, -2, and -3/NAF SON-1 251 120Curtisss XSO3C-1 1 0Vought XSO2U-1 1 0

Totals 942 199

Patrol Aircraft:Martin P3M-2 3 0Consolidated P2Y-2 and -3 41 0

Sikorsky XPBS-1 1 1Consolidated PBY-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, and

-5A 405 248Consolidated PB2Y-1, -2, and -3 7 4Martin PBM-1 and -2 22 13Lockheed PBO-1 18 14

Totals 497 279

Trainer, Transport, and Utility Aircraft:Beech GB-1 and -2 27 0Howard GH-1 6 0Fairchild GK-1 and JK-1 4 0Bellanca JE-1 1 0Waco XJW-1 1 0Grumman JF-1 and -3 15 0Grumman J2F-1, -2, -3, -4, and -5 150 19Lockheed JO-1and -3 2 0Beech JRB-1 and -2 25 0Grumman JRF-1, -2, -3, -4, and -5 34 0North American NJ-1 39 0NAF N3N-1, -2, and -3 943 0NAF XN5N-1 1 0Spartan NP-1 76 0Ryan NR-1 99 0Stearman NS-1, N2S-1, -2, and -3 617 0Consolidated N2Y-1 1 1Douglas RD-3 2 0Douglas R2D-1 2 0Douglas R3D-1 and -2 2 0Douglas R4D-2 2 0Lockheed XR2O-1 and R3O-2 2 0Lockheed XR4O-1 1 0Lockheed R5O-1, -2, and -3 5 0Curtiss SNC-1 148 0North American SNJ-1, -2, and -3 358 14Vultee SNV-1 171 0

Totals 2,730 34

Non-Rigid Airships (Blimps):Goodyear ZNG-type 1 0Goodyear ZNL-type 3 0Goodyear ZPK-type 4 4Goodyear TC-type 2 2

Totals 10 6

Total Navy Aircraft and Airships 5,479 1,061

U.S. Marine Corps AircraftManufacturer/Designation Inventory Assigned to

Combat UnitsAttack Aircraft:Curtiss SBC-4 19 12Douglas SBD-1 and -2 51 46Douglas SB2U-3 53 49

Totals 122 107

Fighter Aircraft:Brewster F2A-2 and -3 14 14Grumman F3F-2 17 15Grumman F4F-3 57 50

Totals 88 79

Observation and Scout Aircraft:Vought OS2U-3 2 2

Trainer, Transport, and Utility Aircraft:Grumman JF-1 1 0Grumman J2F-1, -2A, and -4 17 13Lockheed JO-2 4 2Beech JRB-2 1 0Grumman JRF-1A 1 1Sikorsky JRS-1 1 1Douglas R2D-1 1 1Douglas R3D-2 3 3North American SNJ-2 and -3 13 13

Totals 42 39

Total Marine Aircraft 254 227

U.S. Coast Guard AircraftManufacturer/Designation Inventory Assigned to

Combat UnitsAll Aircraft Types:Grumman JF-2 5 0Grumman J4F-1 8 0Grumman JRF-1, -2, and -3 10 0Fairchild J2K-1 and -2 2 0Hall PH-2 and -3 12 0Consolidated PBY-5 1 0NAF N3N-3 4 0Consolidate N4Y-1 1 0Douglas RD-4 7 0Stinson R3Q-1 1 0Lockheed R3O-1 1 0Lockheed R5O-1 1 0Curtiss SOC-4 3 0

Total Coast Guard Aircraft 56 0

Combined Total All Naval Services 5,789 1,288

Status of Naval Aviation, December 1941 323

Glossary of Naval and Aeronautical Terms

Where a term and an abbreviation are used together, the abbreviationwill be expressed in parentheses following the term.

325

AERODYNAMIC FORCE—A term pertaining to the motion of theair as it acts upon a body (i.e., an aircraft) which is in motion againstit.

AERODYNAMIC LIFT—The upward force, perpendicular to the di-rection of travel, produced by the camber of a wing moving throughthe air.

AFTERBODY—The section of a flying boat or amphibian hull aft ofthe step.

AILERONS—Moveable control surfaces on the trailing edge of eachwing, which, working in opposition, control the rotational motionof aircraft about its longitudinal axis.

AIRFOIL—The shape of a wing or flying surface as seen in cross-section, sometimes referred to as an airfoil section. Airfoils are de-signed to produce lift, or in the case of propellers, thrust.

AIRSPEED—The measurement of an aircraft’s velocity.ALCALD—A trademark used by Alcoa Aluminum Company for a

high-strength sheet of aluminum consisting of an aluminum alloycore having one or both surfaces metallurgically bonded with a purealuminum that is electrochemically resistant to corrosion.

ALTITUDE—The height of an aircraft above the ground or water,usually measured in feet.

AMIDSHIPS—The section of a ship or flying boat halfway betweenthe bow and stern.

AMPHIBIAN—As used in this book, an amphibian refers to anaircraft having a boat-type hull or a pontoon forming a permanentpart of the fuselage and equipped with retractable landing gear thatpermits land operations.

ANGLE-OF-ATTACK (AOA)—The angle formed by the chord of anairfoil and the direction of the aircraft into the relative wind.

ANGLE OF INCIDENCE—The angle between the chord line of awing or horizontal stabilizer and the aircraft’s longitudinal axis.

ANTISUBMARINE WARFARE (ASW)—A branch of warfare usingships or aircraft to detect, track, and/or destroy hostile subma rines.

ARMAMENT—Refers to any type of weapon carried by a ship or anaircraft, including large rifled guns, machine guns and cannons,bombs, torpedoes, depth charges, and mines.

ARRESTING GEAR—Equipment designed to decelerate and stopthe forward motion of an aircraft landing aboard an aircraft carrier.The system originally included a series of elevated traverse and lon-gitudinal wires (pendants), the former to engage the aircraft’s tail-hook and the latter to guide it in a straight direction; however, thelongitudinal wires were deleted in 1926.

ASPECT RATIO—The ratio between the span and the chord widthof an aircraft’s wing. A high aspect ratio wing is typically long and

narrow, while a low aspect ratio wing is short and wide. Aspectratio is usually expressed as the square of the wingspan divided bytotal wing area, for example a Consolidated PBY, with a wingspanof 104 feet and wing area of 1,514 square feet, has an aspect ratio of7.1 [(104)² ÷ 1, 514].

ATHWARTSHIPS—The side-to-side direction, across the beam of aship.

AUXILIARY SHIP—A naval ship designed to support warships andnaval shore operations by providing logistical replenishment, repair,transport, and/or command and control.

BALANCED CONTROL SURFACE—A moveable control surface,such as an aileron or elevator, which incorporates a weight forwardof the hinge point to reduce control forces on the stick or yoke.

BARRIER—A traverse system of vertical and horizontal cables, lo-cated amidships, raised to stop an aircraft that has missed the ar-resting wires of an aircraft carrier.

BEAM—The width of a ship at its widest point.BIPLANE—An aircraft having two wings, an upper and lower. Some

early aircraft also featured a biplane horizontal stabilizer and ele-vator.

BLIMP—An airship with no internal framework using hydrostaticpressure upon its outer envelope to maintain its aerodynamic shape.The term is thought to have been originated by the Royal Naval Avi-ation Service during World War I as a contraction of B-class airshipand “limp.”

BOW—The most forward point or nose of a boat hull or float.CABANE STRUT—Struts used on a biplane, triplane, or parasol

mono plane to attach the wings to the fuselage or hull.CALIBRE—The inside diameter of the bore of a gun barrel and the

projectile fired from it, measured in inches (or fractions thereof )or millimeters.

CAMBER—The curvature of the upper and lower surfaces of an air-foil.

CANTILEVERED—An aircraft wing or flying surface wholly sup-ported by its internal structure without need for external bracing.

CATAPULT—A shipboard system for launching aircraft from a shipusing air pressure, gunpowder, flywheels, or hydraulics as a pro-pellant.

CEILING—The maximum height above sea level, normally measuredin feet, attainable by aircraft under standard atmospheric condi-tions.

CENTER OF GRAVITY (CG)—The lateral and longitudinal point atwhich an aircraft balances.

CENTER OF PRESSURE—The aerodynamic point of a wing where

the pitching moment (i.e., tendency to pitch nose up or nose down)is constant with the angle-of-attack.

CHORD—The distance between the leading and trailing edges of awing. In the case of a tapered or elliptical wing, the distance is ex-pressed as the mean aerodynamic chord. The term is also used inreference to tail surfaces, control surfaces, and flaps.

CONSTANT-SPEED PROPELLER—An electrically or hydraulicallycontrolled propeller equipped with a governor that automaticallychanges pitch to maintain a constant RPM in response to changesin power settings.

CONTROL STICK—A moveable lever mounted in the cockpitdirectly in front of the pilot that controls the aircraft’s elevators(fore and aft) and ailerons (side to side). Variously known as thejoystick or simply the stick.

CONTROL YOKE—A wheel or partial wheel mounted on a shaft orcolumn in the cockpit directly in front of the pilot that controls theaircraft’s elevators (pushed and pulled) and ailerons (rotated sideto side).

CONVENTIONAL LANDING GEAR—A configuration having thetwo main landing wheels located in front of the CG and a tailwheelor skid at the rear. Popularly known today as a “taildragger.”

COWL FLAP—A moveable flap, usually located at the rear of a enginecowling, that regulates the flow of air through the cowling.

COWLING—A removable fairing around an aircraft engine that im-proves streamlining and cooling.

DECK—The top section of a flying boat or amphibian hull.DEPTH CHARGE—An underwater ASW weapon using an acoustic,

hydrostatic (pressure), or magnetic fuse to trigger detonation.DIHEDRAL—An upward angle of the wings or horizontal flying sur-

faces in relation to the horizontal cross-section of the aircraft.DORSAL—A location on the upper section of a hull as in a dorsal

turret or dorsal fin.DRAG—The resistance caused by the motion of an aircraft through

the air. There are generally two forms of drag: (1) parasite drag causedby the friction of the outer surfaces of aircraft; and (2) induced draggenerated by the lift of the wing and other flying surfaces.

DRAG RING—A cambered ring encircling the cylinders of a radialengine for the purpose of improving streamlining and cooling. Alsoknown as a cowl or speed ring.

DRAG WIRE—A rigging wire in an aircraft’s structure designed toresist forward and backward aerodynamic loads.

DURAL—Originally a trade name, now used generically, for anywrought aluminum containing alloys of copper, magnesium, andman ganese. Also known under the Alcoa trade name “Duralumi -num.”

ELEVATOR—A moveable surface at the rear of a horizontal stabilizercontrolling the pitch (nose up or nose down) of an aircraft aroundits lateral axis.

EMPENNAGE—The tail group of an aircraft, including the verticalstabilizer and rudder, horizontal stabilizer and elevator, and anysupporting structures.

EMPTY WEIGHT—The weight of an aircraft less crew, passengers,cargo, baggage, armament (if military), and usable fuel.

FAIRING—A non-structural component added to the outside of anaircraft to reduce drag.

FIN—See, vertical stabilizer.FIREWALL—A fire-resistant bulkhead between the engine compart-

ment and the fuselage/hull or nacelles.FLAG RANK—The naval rank of rear admiral or above, which cor-

responds to the rank of major general in the Army or Marine Corps.FLAGSHIP—A naval ship within a fleet, typically a warship, iden ti -

fied as the headquarters of the commanding admiral and from whichhe “flies his flag.”

FLAP—A hinged surface on the trailing edge of the wing which

changes the camber in order to increase lift and drag. The loweringof flaps has the effect of lowering stall speeds, decreasing angle-of-attack, and causing the aircraft to fly more slowly. The most com-mon types of flap systems are:1. SPLIT—A flap consisting of a plate hinged from the bottom

surface of the wing.2. PLAIN—A flap consisting of a hinged section of the entire

trailing edge of the wing.3. SLOTTED—A flap in the shape of an airfoil which, when low-

ered, is positioned to form a slot between the wing and the lead-ing edge of the flap.

4. FOWLER TYPE—A slotted flap, named for engineer HarlandD. Fowler, that moves both rearward and downward on a track,thereby increasing camber and effective wing area.

FLOATPLANE—An aircraft having one or more detachable floats forits primary buoyancy, as differentiated from a boat-hulled flyingboat or amphibian.

FLYING BOAT—An aircraft having a boat-type hull that possessesno type of landing gear, retractable or detachable, for land oper -ations. Some flying boats may be equipped with built-in wheelsused only for beaching.

FLYING WIRE—A collective term for all of an aircraft’s riggingwires: drag wires, landing wires, and lift wires. Early flying boatswere highly dependent on flying wires to support and distribute nor-mal aerodynamic loads.

FORMER—A structural or non-structural internal member of a fuse-lage or boat-hull that forms its outside shape in cross-section.

FRAME CONSTRUCTION—A type of fuselage or hull constructionwhere most of the structural, hydrodynamic, and aerodynamic loadsare supported by an internal framework. In early aircraft such frame-works were usually constructed of wood; later methods use weldedsteel tubing or riveted aluminum extrusions.

FRISE AILERON—A type of aileron, named after engineer LeslieG. Frise, having a beveled leading edge and mounted forward of itsinset hinges. When raised, its nose produces drag and decreases ad-verse yaw, thus requiring less or no rudder input during a bankedturn.

FUSELAGE—The main body of an aircraft housing the cockpit, pas-senger cabin and/or cargo space and to which the wings and tail -plane are attached. In the case of a flying boat or amphibian, thefuselage and hull are normally integrated as one structure.

GAP—The vertical distance between the upper and lower wings of abiplane or triplane.

GROSS WEIGHT—The design weight of an aircraft when fullyloaded with fuel, crew, passengers, cargo, and armaments (if mili-tary). The term is sometimes expressed as normal gross, the weightat which the aircraft remains within its airframe operating lim i -tations, and maximum takeoff, which contemplates that the air craftwill reach normal gross following a predictable fuel burn-off.

HORIZONTAL STABILIZER—The fixed portion of the horizontaltailplane to which the elevator is attached.

HORSEPOWER (hp)—A measure of the motive energy required toraise 550 lbs. to a height of one foot in one second.

INLINE ENGINE—A type of reciprocating piston engine in whichan even (4-6-8-12) number of cylinders are arranged either in astraight line or in a V-type configuration directly above (or below)the crankcase. Most early inline aircraft engines were water-cooledvia a radiator system, though air-cooled types began to appearduring the 1930s.

INTERPLANE STRUT—One or more pairs of vertical (or nearly ver-tical) biplane or triplane struts, located outside of the cabanes, whichtransmit aerodynamic loads between wing panels and maintain an-gles of incidence. Some interplane struts, known as “N” struts, fea-ture an additional drag strut between them.

326 Glossary of Naval and Aeronautical Terms

ISLAND—A superstructure, typically located on the starboard side,amidships, of an aircraft carrier, which houses the bridge, navi -gation, and flight operations decks.

KNOT—As a measurement of speed, about 1.15 mph, and of distance(i.e., a nautical mile), about 1.15 statute miles or 6,076 feet.

LANDING WIRE—A rigging wire in a wing or tail structure designedto resist negative (downward) aerodynamic loads.

LEADING EDGE—The forward most part of an aircraft’s wing orflying surfaces.

LENGTH OVERALL (LOA)—The maximum length of a vessel fromtwo points on the hull measured perpendicular to the waterline.

LIFT WIRE—A rigging wire in a wing or tail structure designed toresist positive aerodynamic (upward) loads.

LOAD FACTOR (G)—A measurement of the force acting upon anaircraft due to acceleration or gravity, usually expressed in units ofG times one.

LONGERON—A main longitudinal structural member in a fuselageor hull.

MARITIME PATROL—An over-water military mission that can in-clude long-range reconnaissance, convoy escort, aerial attack, mine-laying, and ASW.

MONOCOQUE—A type of fuselage or hull design in which most ofthe structural and aerodynamic loads are carried by the outer skinrather than internal bracing.

MONOPLANE—An aircraft having one set of wing surfaces,mounted in various configurations as low-wing, mid-wing, shoul-der-wing, high-wing, or parasol-wing.

NACELLE—A streamlined structure used to house engines, landinggear, weapons, or in some instances, a cockpit or cabin

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS(NACA)—A U.S. government agency established in 1915 to carryout and make available various forms of aeronautical research.Aerodynamic forms tested and developed by the agency, such asairfoils and cowlings, are known by NACA number or type.

NAVAL ATTACHÉ FOR AIR—A naval officer attached to a U.S. Em-bassy staff who acts as a representative to the host nation and alsoobserves and gather intelligence data relative to the host nation’smilitary capabilities.

PAYLOAD—The proportion of an aircraft’s useful load over and abovefuel and required crew.

PITCH—The nose up and down motion of an aircraft about its lateralaxis.

PLANFORM—The general arrangement of an aircraft as seen directlyfrom above or below.

PLANING SURFACE—The bottom portion of a flying boat’s or am-phibian’s hull or float which is in contact with the water.

PORT—The left side of a boat or aircraft or, facing forward, the di-rection to the left of it.

POWER-TO-WEIGHT RATIO—For the aircraft, the rated horsepoweror thrust divided by the gross weight; for the powerplant only, therated horsepower or thrust divided by the weight of the engine andaccessories.

PROPELLER PITCH—The angle of a propeller blade in relation toits rotational arc; also, the measurement of the forward distance ad-vanced by a propeller blade in one full arc of rotation.

PUSHER—An engine mounted with its propeller facing aft.PYLON—A streamlined structural member supporting a wing,

tailplane, or engine.RADAR (Radio Detection and Ranging)—An electronic system that

uses electromagnetic waves to identify the range, altitude, direction,and speed of moving or stationary objects such as aircraft, ships,weather features, or terrain.

RADIAL ENGINE—A type of reciprocating piston engine in whichthe cylinders are arranged around the crankcase like the spokes on

a wheel. An odd number (5-7-9) of pistons are connected to thecrankshaft via a master-and-articulating-rod assembly.

RAMPING—A process by which an amphibian or flying boatequipped with beaching gear uses its own power to taxi from thewater onto the shore.

ROLL—The rotational motion of an aircraft about its longitudinalaxis.

ROTARY ENGINE—An early type of reciprocating engine in whichthe cylinders were arranged around the crankcase similar to a radial,but where the crankshaft was fixed and the entire crankcase, towhich the propeller was mounted, rotated around it.

RUDDER—A moveable surface at the rear of a vertical stabilizer con-trolling the yaw (nose left or nose right) of an aircraft about its ver-tical axis.

SEAPLANE—A generic term for any aircraft capable of taking offfrom and landing on the water.

SEMI-CANTILEVERED—An aircraft wing or flying surface sup-ported partly by internal structure and partly by external bracing.

SEMI-MONOCOCQUE—A type of fuselage, hull, or nacelle con-struction where the outside skin is supported by internal formersand stringers that share the structural, hydrodynamic, and aerody-namic loads. It is the most common method used in the fabricationof fuselages and hulls from aluminum.

SESQUIPLANE—A biplane configuration in which the lower wingpossesses much less area than the upper wing.

SLAT—A moveable surface on the leading edge of a wing which in-creases both camber and airflow. Slats can be manual or designedto automatically extend at higher angles-of-attack.

SLOT—A spanwise gap in the leading edge of a wing which increasesairflow over the upper surface at higher angles-of-attack.

SPAR—The main structural member of an aircraft wing or flying sur-face running perpendicular to or across its longitudinal axis. Sparsare typically designed to resist any structural or aerodynamic loads,i.e., lift, landing, drag, and torsion.

SPOILER—A moveable plate on the upper surface of a wing for the purpose of causing drag or, when used differentially, to induceroll.

SPONSONS—Buoyant extensions to the sides of a boat hull’s fore-body. Large airfoil-shaped sponsons, located near the center-of-gravity, have been used in lieu of stabilizing floats under the wings.One-piece stabilizing floats on small amphibians are sometimes re-ferred to as sponsons.

SPRAY RAILS—Metal flanges attached to the chine of a boat-hullor float forebody that are designed to reduce the water spray throwninto a propeller.

STABILIZING FLOATS—Small floats located under the outboardwing panels of a flying boat or amphibian to prevent the wingtipsfrom contacting the water. Also commonly referred to as tip or wingfloats.

STAGGER—The relative fore and aft relationship between the leadingedges of the upper and lower wings of a biplane or triplane. If theleading edge of the upper wing is forward of that of the lower wing,the aircraft is said to have “positive” stagger. The reverse is true for“negative” stagger.

STALL—An event that causes the wing to lose lift to the extent thatit will no longer support the weigh of the aircraft. A stall is causedby an increase in angle-of-attack and resulting loss of airspeed. An“accelerated “ stall occurs when the aircraft reaches critical angle-of-attack while accelerating in excess of one-G.

STARBOARD—The right side of a boat or aircraft or, facing forward,the direction to the right of it.

STEP—A transverse gap between the fore-and afterbodies of a boat-hull or float near or just behind the center-of-gravity. In principle,the step allows the hydrodynamic lift generated by the forebody to

Glossary of Naval and Aeronautical Terms 327

lift the afterbody clear of the water once sufficient forward speedis attained.

STERN—The most rearward point of a ship or flying boat hull.STRAKE—A longitudinal member on the outside of a boat-hull or

float which adds structural rigidity and directional stability. Some-times known as a keelson.

STRINGER—A longitudinal member on the inside of a fuselage,boat-hull, or float which adds structural rigidity to the skin. Stingersare also sometimes used for the same purpose in the spanwise con-struction of wings and flying surfaces.

SUPERSTRUCTURE—Any structure of a ship built above the maindeck.

SWEEPBACK—The rearward angle between the quarter chord line(i.e., the distance between the leading and trailing edges) of an air-craft’s wing and its longitudinal centerline.

TAILPLANE—See, empennage, above.TAPER—The angle of a wing or tail surface from root to tip as meas-

ured from its leading and/or training edge.THRUST—An aerodynamic force propelling an aircraft through the

air. Thrust may be produced by a propeller or by the expelled gasesof a jet or rocket engine. In principle, thrust must exceed drag (aero-dynamic and hydrodynamic) in order for an aircraft to achieve flight,and in a level, cruising attitude, thrust and drag are equal.

TORPEDO—A self-propelled explosive weapon launched into thewater by a ship, submarine or aircraft.

TORQUE—The rotational force imparted by a turning propeller whichcauses an aircraft to rotate in the opposite direction, thereby induc -ing roll and yaw.

TRACTOR—An engine mounted with its propeller facing forward.TRAILING EDGE—The rear most part of an aircraft’s wing or flying

surfaces.TRICYCLE LANDING GEAR—A configuration having the two main

landing wheels located aft of the CG and a nosewheel mounted tothe front.

TRIM TAB—A small, adjustable or fixed control surface located onor within the trailing edge of a rudder, elevator, or aileron. Ad just -able trim tabs, controlled from the cockpit, are used to reduce theaerodynamic forces imposed on flight controls; fixed trim tabs areadjusted on the ground to enable the aircraft to maintain trim inlevel flight.

TRIPLANE—An aircraft having three wings, an upper, middle, andlower.

TURRET—An enclosed gun mounting on a ship or aircraft that maybe simultaneously traversed and elevated.

USEFUL LOAD—The added weight of an aircraft’s fuel, crew, pas-sengers, baggage, cargo, and armaments (if military). Armament(i.e., weapons load) may be considered separately.

UTILITY AMPHIBIAN—A type of single and multi-engine amphib-ian used by all Naval Aviation branches U.S. military branches from1923 for ship-to shore transportation, search and rescue, and, oc-casionally, coastal maritime patrol.

VARIABLE PITCH PROPELLER—A hydraulically or mechanicallycontrolled two-position propeller that can be varied from high RPMfor takeoff and climb to low RPM for level flight and cruise.

VERTICAL STABILZER—The fixed portion of the vertical tailplaneto which the rudder is attached.

WASH-OUT—A feature of wing design in which a slight amount of‘twist’ (as seen from the side) reduces angle of incidence from rootto tip. For reasons of stability, an amount of washout is normallyincorporated to insure that the wing stalls at the root (which has ahigher angle-of-attack) before reaching the tip. Wash-in, rarely everseen, is the opposite of wash-out.

WEAPONS OR BOMB BAY—A fully enclosed compartment in thebelly of an aircraft for stowage of weapons such as bombs,torpedoes, or depth charges. In flying boats, the enclosure may belocated in the bottom of wing nacelles or within the hull to belaunched over the side via a track system.

WEAPONS RACK—An external rack fitted under the wing or bellyof an aircraft for the purpose of carrying bombs, mines, depthcharges, or torpedoes.

WING LOADING—The wing area of an aircraft divided by its grossweight, usually expressed in pounds per square foot.

WING RIB—A chordwise member of a wing structure that forms itsairfoil shape and transmits aerodynamic loads from the skin to thespars. Wing ribs may be fabricated from wood, aluminum, or com-posite material.

YAW—The side-to-side motion of an aircraft about its vertical axis.

328 Glossary of Naval and Aeronautical Terms

Bibliography

329

Books and Periodicals

Allward, Maurice. An Illustrated History of Seaplanes and Flying Boats.New York: Dorset, 1981.

Althoff, William F. Sky Ships: A History of the Airship in the UnitedStates Navy. New York: Orion, 1990.

Andrade, Ernest. “The Ship That Never Was: The Flying-Deck Cruiser.”The Journal of Military History, Vol. 32, No. 3, December 1968.

Bowers, Peter M. Curtiss Aircraft 1907–1946. Annapolis, MD: Naval In-stitute, 1987.

_____. Forgotten Fighters and Experimental Aircraft U.S. Navy 1918–1941, Vol. 1. New York: Arco, 1971.

_____. “Scout Bomber.” Wings, Vol. 15, No. 2, April 1985.Breihan, John R. Martin Aircraft 1909–1960. Santa Ana, CA: Narkie -

wicz/ Thompson, 1995.Chesneau, Roger. Aircraft Carriers of the World, 1914 to the Present.

Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1984.Dean, Jack. “Dive Bomber.” Wings, Vol. 15 No. 2, April 1985.Doll, Thomas E., Berkley R. Jackson, and William A. Riley. Navy Air

Col ors: United States Navy, Marine, and Coast Guard Aircraft Cam -ou flage and Markings, 1911–1945, Vol. 1. Carrollton, TX: Squadron-Signal, 1983.

Francillon, Rene J. Grumman Aircraft Since 1929. Annapolis, MD: NavalInstitute, 1989.

_____. McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Since 1920. Annapolis, MD: NavalInstitute, 1990.

Friedman, Norman. U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design His-tory. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1983.

_____. U.S. Cruisers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, MD:Naval Institute, 1984.

_____. U.S. Naval Weapons. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1985.Green, William. War Planes of the Second World War: Fighters, Vol. 4.

Garden City, NY: Hanover House, 1961.Grossnick, Roy A. United States Naval Aviation 1910–1995. Naval Avi-

ation History Branch, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,DC, 1996. Available at www.history.navy.mil.

_____, ed. Kite Balloons to Airships: The Navy’s Lighter-Than-Air Ex-perience. Naval Air Systems Command, U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, DC, 1987.

Gunston, Bill. American Warplanes. New York: Crescent, 1986.Hone, Thomas C., and Trent Hone. Battle Line: The United States Navy,

1919–1939. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 2006.Hone, Trent. “Building a Doctrine: U.S. Naval Tactics and Battle Plans

in the Interwar Period.” The Journal of Military History, Vol. 67, No.4, October 2003.

Johnson, E. R. American Attack Aircraft Since 1926. Jefferson, NC: Mc-Farland, 2008.

_____. American Flying Boats and Amphibious Aircraft: An IllustratedHistory. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2009.

_____. “Northrop Attack Aircraft 1933–1937.” Skyways Journal of theAirplane, No. 81, January 2007.

_____. “One Wing or Two? U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Fighters, 1930–1940.” Skyways Journal of the Airplane, No. 85, January 2008.

_____. “Strike Force in the Making: U.S. Naval Carrier-Based AttackAircraft Developments from 1926 to 1940.” Skyways Journal of theAirplane, No. 73, January 2005.

Jones, Lloyd S. U.S. Fighters, 1925 to 1980s. Fallbrook, CA: Aero, 1975.Kuehn, John T. “The Influence of Naval Arms Limitation on U.S. Naval

Innovation During the Interwar Period, 1921–1937.” Abstract of dis-sertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, 2007. Available athttp://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/ bitstream/2097/259/1/ JohnKuehn2007.pdf.

Larkins, William T. Battleship and Cruiser Aircraft of the United StatesNavy. Atglen, PA: Schiffer, 1990.

_____. U.S. Navy Aircraft, 1921–1941. Concord, CA: Aviation History,1961.

_____. USMC Aircraft, 1914–1959. Concord, CA: Aviation History, 1959.Lawson, Robert L., ed. The History of U.S. Naval Airpower. New York:

Crown, 1985.Love, Robert W. History of the U.S. Navy, Vol. I, 1775–1941. Harrisburg,

PA: Stackpole, 1992.Margiotta, Franklin D., ed. “History of Airpower.” In Brassey’s Encyclo -

pedia of Military History and Biography. Washington, DC: Brassey’s,1994.

“Marine Corps Aircraft, 1913–1965.” Marine Corps Historical ReferencePamphlet, Historical Branch, U.S. Marine Corps, Washington, DC,revised 1967.

Matt, Paul R., and Bruce Robertson. United States Navy and MarineCorps Fighters, 1918–1962. Los Angeles, CA: Aero, 1962.

Mersky, Peter B. U.S. Marine Corps Aviation 1912 to the Present. Bal-timore, MD: Nautical and Aviation, 1983.

Morrison, Samuel Eliot. The Two-Ocean War. Boston: Little, Brown,1963.

Percy, Arthur. U.S. Coast Guard Aircraft Since 1916. Annapolis, MD:Naval Institute, 1991.

Preston, Anthony, and Louis S. Casey. Sea Power: A Modern IllustratedMilitary History. New York: Exeter, 1979.

Sheina, Robert L. A History of Coast Guard Aviation. U.S. Coast GuardHistorian’s Office, Washington, DC, 1986. Available at http://www.uscg. mil/ history/articles/CGAviation.pdf.

Sherrod, Robert. History of Marine Corps Aviation in World War II.Washington, DC: Combat Forces, 1952.

Shock, James R. U.S. Navy Airships, 1915–1962. Edgewater, FL: Atlantis,1992.

Smith, Hershel. A History of Aircraft Piston Engines. Manhattan, KS:Sunflower University Press, 1986.

Smith, Peter C. The History of Dive Bombing. Annapolis, MD: Nauticaland Aviation, 1981.

Swanborough, Gordon, and Peter M. Bowers. United States Navy AircraftSince 1911, 2d ed. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1976.

Taylor, Michael J. H. Warplanes of the World 1918–1939. New York:Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1981.

Terzibaschitsch, Stefan. Aircraft Carriers of the U.S. Navy, 2d reviseded. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1989.

_____. Cruisers of the United States Navy. Annapolis, MD: Naval Insti-tute, 1988.

Thetford, Owen. British Naval Aircraft Since 1912. London: Putnam,1962.

Trimble, William F. Wings for the Navy: A History of the Naval AircraftFactory, 1917–1956. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 1996.

Ventry, Lord, and Eugene Kolesnik, eds. Jane’s Pocket Book of Airships.New York: Macmillan, 1977.

Wagner, Ray. American Combat Planes, 3d ed. Garden City, NY: Dou-bleday, 1982.

Wildenberg, Thomas. “Midway: Sheer Luck or Better Doctrine?” NavyDepartment Library, Naval Historical Center, Washington, DC, 2004.Available at http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/sheerluck_midway.htm.

Websites“Air Units of the Imperial Japanese Navy.” Global Security Military,

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/ijn-air.htm/.“The Battle of the Coral Sea 7–8 May 1942.” Battles of the Pacific War,

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/battles/coral_sea.htm.“The Battle of Midway 4 –6 June 1942.” Battles of the Pacific War,

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/battles/midway.htm.“Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Co.” Virtual Aircraft Museum, http://

www.aviastar.org/manufacturers/0647.html.“Dictionary of American Naval Aviation Squadrons, Vol. 2.” Naval Avi-

ation History Office, http://history.navy.mil.branches/dictvol2.htm.“The Early Carrier Raids: February and March 1942.” Battles of the

Pacific War, http://www.microworks.net/pacific/battles/early_carrier_raids.htm.

“Early Years: 1912–1941.” History of Marine Corps Aviation, http://www.ace pilots. com/usmc/hist1.html.

“The Early Years (1915–1938) and the Growth Years (1939–1956),” CoastGuard Aviation History, http://uscgaviationhistory.aoptero.org/.

Eckland, K.O., ed. “Aircraft A–Z.” Aerofiles, http://www.aerofiles.com/aircraft.html.

Flavell, Aird. “Flying Boats of the World, A Complete Reference.” WorldFlying Boat, http://www.msacomputer.com/FlyingBoats-old/.

“Grumman Aircraft.” KensAviation.com, http://www.shanaberger.com/grumman.htm.

“Japanese Aircraft Carriers.” Imperial Japanese Navy Page, http:// www.combinedfleet.com/cv.htm.

“Martin Aircraft.” Glenn L. Martin Maryland Aviation Museum, http://www.marylandaviationmuseum.org/history/index.html.

McKillop, Jack, and Craig Swan. “Brown-Shoe Navy.” U.S. Naval Avi-ation Historical, http://www.microworks.net/pacific/aviation/ index.htm.

“Midway: The Battle and the Diversions.” Encyclopedia of the NavalBattles of World War 2, http://users.swing.be/navbat/bataille/146.html.

“Naval Aviation Chronology Files.” Naval Aviation History Office,http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org4-5.htm.

“Naval Aviation 1911–1986, A Pictorial Study.” U.S. Navy History Branch,http://www.history.navy.mil/download/pict-m4.pdf.

“Operations to Relieve Wake Island December 1941.” Battles of thePacific War, http://www.microworks.net/pacific/battles/relief_ of_wake. htm.

Pike, John, ed. “1921 Naval Conference, 1927 Geneva Naval Conference,1930 London Naval Conference, 1932 Geneva Peace Conference, and1935 London Naval Conference.” Global Security Military, http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/military/system.htm.

“Records of the Bureau of Aeronautics 1911–1972.” National Archives,http://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/072.html.

“S-38, S-43, and S/VS-44.” Sikorsky Historical Archives, http://www.sikor skyarchives.com/.

“Scouting Airplanes.” NavSource Naval History, http://navsource3.org/archives/ 01/57k.htm.

“Ships or Aircraft Sunk or Survived at Pearl Harbor.” Official Site of theAttack on Pearl Harbor, http://www.pearlharbor.org/ships-and-air-craft.asp.

“U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers, and Sea-plane Tenders.” Dictionary of Naval Fighting Ships Online, http://www.hazegray.org/navhist.

“U.S. Navy Aircraft 1922–1962 Designation System.” Navy History andHertitage Command, http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/ac-usn22/ac-usn22.htm.

“Vought Heritage.” Vought Aircraft Industries Retiree Club, http:// www.voughtaircraft.com/heritage/years/html/03-16.html.

330 Bibliography

Index

331

4-AT 1925-AT 1925:5:3:1:1 capital ship ratio 317HT-4 11518-T 31239-B 17640-F 179

A Class (blimps) 252A-17 43A-17A 43A-20 57A-20B 57–58A-29 167AC-3 268AC-12 285Admiral (aircraft) 151Advanced Carrier Training Group (ACTG) 321Aerial Engineering Corp. 314Aerial gun spotting 4Aeromarine Aircraft: 39-B 176; 40-F 179;

AS 196AG-16 288AG-17 288Aggressive offensive action, tactic 4Airabonita 99–100Airco DH-4 10–11Aircraft Carrier Procurement, Synopsis of

267–268Aircraft Development Airships: ZMC-2 248–

249Aircraft Development Corp. 248Aircraft Utilization (battleships) 289, 292Aircraft Utilization (cruisers) 294–295Airships 241; designations 320; unit organi-

zation 320–321Akagi, IJN 3Akron, USS 249Albermarle, USS 286AM-1 282AM-2 282AM-10 282AM-18 282AM-19 282AM-23 282AM-27 282AM-34 282AM-41 282AM-51 282Amphibious aircraft 102–103, 112, 173–174,

325Amphibious Cruiser Scout Requirement of

1932 103, 126 –128

Anti- carrier doctrine 4Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) 137, 252–

253, 325AO-9 284Approach Formation 6Archer, HMS 279Argus, HMS 267Arizona, USS 288, 290Arkansas, USS 289Armored cruisers (ACR) 292Army Airship Service 253Aroostook, USS 281Aroostook class (seaplane tenders) 281Arresting gear 268–269AS 196Astra- Torres AT (blimp) 252AT-6A 228AT-7 232AT-11 232Atlanta, USS 293Atlantic Aircraft: Fokker Aircraft Corp. of

America 188; JA 190; TA/RA 188Attack Aircraft Procurement, synopsis of 9–

10Autogyros, suitability of 103, 122, 129Auxiliary ships 325AV-1 283AV-2 285AV-3 269AV-4 286AV-5 286AV-6 284AV-7 288AV-8 287AV-9 287AVD-1 286AVD-2 286AVD-3 286AVD-4 286AVD-5 286AVD-6 286AVD-7 286AVD-8 286AVD-9 286AVD-10 286AVD-11 286AVD-12 286AVD-13 286AVD-14 286Avenger 54–55AVG-1 278Avocet, USS 282AVP-1 282

AVP-2 282AVP-3 282AVP-4 282AVP-5 282AVP-6 282AVP-7 282AVP-8 282AVP-9 282AVP-10 287AVP-11 287AVP-12 287AVP-14 286AVP-15 286AVP-16 286AVP-17 286AVP-18 286AVP-19 286AVP-20 287AVP-21 287AZ-1 283

B class (blimps) 252–254B-1 254B-2 216B-10 254B-11 254B-12 254B-13 254B-14 254B-15 254B-16 254B-17 254B17L 225B-18 254B-19 254B-20 254B-25 58Ballard, USS 286Baltimore class (heavy cruisers) 293Ban on land- based bombardment operations

9, 24, 138, 167Barnegat, USS 286 –287Barnegat class (small seaplane tenders) 281,

286 –287Battle Fleet after World War I 288–292Battle formation 6Battle Line 4–5, 270, 288Battlecruisers 3, 267, 270Battleships 3, 288–292Bayerische Flugzeugwerke 311BB-30 288BB-31 288BB-32 288

BB-33 289BB-34 289, 291BB-35 289BB-36 288BB-37 288, 290BB-38 288BB-39 288, 290BB-40 289BB-41 289BB-42 289BB-43 289, 291BB-44 288–289BB-45 289BB-46 288BB-48 288BB-55 288–289BB-56 288BC-1 227BC-3 237BD-1 57–58BD-2 57–58Bee Line BR-1 314Bee Line BR-2 314Beech Aircraft: JB/GB 225–226; JRB 231–

232Beisel, Rex 61, 71–72, 101Belknap, USS 286Bell Aircraft: FL 99–100Bellanca Aircraft: RE 203–204; SE 123;

SOE 131–132Berliner- Joyce Aircraft: FJ 76 –77; F2J 83–

84; F3J 88; OJ 119B.F. Goodrich Airships: B- Class 254; C-

Class 255; D- Class 257B.F. Goodrich Co. 253–256Bf.108B 311BFB-1 85-BFC-2 81–82BF2C-1 81–83BG-1 32–33B2G-1 37–39Biscayne, USS 287Blackburn Mk.II Swift 303Blimp 241, 252–253, 320BM-1 28–29, C-6BM-2 28–29Boeing 247, 209Boeing Aircraft: BFB 85; FB 62–65, C-3;

F2B 68–69; F3B 70; F4B 73–75, C-5; F5B77–78; F6B 85; F7B 87; NB 184–185, C-3;N2B 194–195; NS 214–215; N2S 214–215; O2B 10–11, C-1; PB 144; TB 23–24

Boeing Airplane Co. 63, 144, 184Bomber- Fighters (BF) 9, 59, 81, 267Bombers (B) 9, 29Bombing unit organization (VB, VMB,

VMSB) 321Booth Racer 314BR-1 314BR-2 314Brewster Aeronautical Corp. 44Brewster Aircraft: F2A 93–96, C-8; SBA

44–46; SB2A 53–54Bristol Bulldog IIa 309British Admiralty SSZ-23 Airship 252, 300Brooklyn class (light cruisers) 293–295Brown, Dayton 94BST-1 303BT-1 43–44BT-2 43, 51

BT-9 225, 227, 237BT-13 237BT-13A 237Buccaneer 53–54Buffalo 93–96Burgess Co. 174BY-1 30–32B2Y-1 33–34

C class (blimps) 254–256C-1 255C.I 305C3-type (merchant vessels) 268, 279, 281,

287C-5 256C-7 216C-44 311C-45A 232C-45B 232C-47A 235C.500 310C.625 310–311CA-24 293–294CA-25 293CA-26 293–294CA-27 293–294CA-28 293–294CA-29 293–294CA-30 293–294CA-31 293–294CA-32 293–294CA-33 293–294CA-34 293–294CA-35 293–294CA-36 293–294CA-37 293–295CA-38 293–294CA-39 293–294CA-44 293–294CA-45 293–295California, USS 288–289Camel F.1 292, 299CAMX-1 radar system 272, 274–275Capital ships 3Carrier Air Group (CVG) 5, 269–270, 273–

274, 277, 280, 321Carrier Air Group Commander (CAG) 5Carrier Warfare Model 7Casco, USS 287Caspar (Heinkel) U.1 307Catalina 159–162Catapult Development 288–289, 293–294Caudron C.635 Simoun 310–311Chance Vought Corp. 104Charles Ausburn, USS 297Charleston, USS 298Childs, USS 280, 285–286Childs class (aviation tender, destroyer) 285–

286CF 296Cincinnati, USS 294CL-4 293–294CL-5 293–294CL-6 293–294CL-7 293–294CL-8 293–294CL-9 293–294CL-10 293–294CL-11 293–294CL-12 293–294

CL-13 293–194CL-40 293–295CL-41 293–294CL-42 293–295CL-43 293–294CL-46 293–294CL-47 293–294CL-48 293–294CL-49 293–294CL-50 293–294CL-55 268, 280Clear deck landing procedure 4Clemson, USS 286Clemson class (destroyer) 286Cloudster 17CLV 295–296CM-3 281–282CM-4 281–282COA-1 112Coast Guard Aircraft, Status of, December

1941 323Coast Guard Aviation, emergence of 8Coast Guard Cutters 298Connecticut Aircraft Airships: B- Class 254;

DN-1 252Connecticut Aircraft Co. 252Consolidated Aircraft: BY 30–31; B2Y 33–

34; NY/N3Y 186 –188, C-5; N2Y 196 –197; N4Y 204–205; PY 150–151; P2Y156 –157, C-5; P4Y 169–170; PBY 159–162, C-7; PB2Y 164–166; TBY 55–57

Consolidated Aircraft Co. 137, 150, 160, 186Convertible Fighter (TS) 61–62Coral Sea, Battle of 272, 276Corregidor 171Corsair 100–102, 114–115Courageous, HMS 3Cox- Klemin Aircraft: XS 110–111Cox- Klemin Aircraft Corp. 111C17R 225Crash barrier 4, 325Crossing the “T” 4Cruiser Procurement after World War I 292–

293Cruisers (ACR, CA, CL, CS) 292–293Cruising Formation 6CS-1 20–21, C-3CS-2 21CsII 303CT-1 15–17Cunningham, Maj. Alfred A. 7Currituck, USS 288Curtiss, USS 286Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co. 65Curtiss Aircraft: 18-T 312; BF2C 81–83; CS

20–21, C-3; CT 15–17; F6C 65–66, 318,C-4; F7C 71–72; F8C/OC/O2C 72–73;F9C 78–79; F11C/BFC 81–83; F13C 88–89; H-16 138–139, C-1; H75B 92; HS139–140; JN 177–178; MF 178–179; N-9174–175, C-1; NC 141–142, C-2; N2C195–196; R-6 11–12; RC (racer) 313; R2C316 –317; R3C 316 –317; R4C 207–208;S2C 124–125; S3C/F10C 125–126;SBC/F12C 34–36; SB2C 52–53; SNC 236;SOC/SO2C 129–130, C-7; SO3C 136 –137;TS/F4C 61–62, C-2

Curtiss class (heavy seaplane tender) 280,286

Curtiss Marine Trophy 312

332 Index

Curtiss- Wright Corp. 81CV-1 4, 7, 9, 267–269CV-2 4, 9, 270–272CV-3 4, 9, 270–273CV-4 267–268, 272–274CV-5 267–268, 274–276CV-6 268, 275–276CV-7 267–268, 276 –278CV-8 267–268, 275–276CV-9 268, 279–280CV-9F 268, 279CVE-1 268, 278–279CVL-22 280CW-21 236CW-22 236

D class (blimps) 256 –257D-1 257D.1 308–309D-2 257D-3 257D-4 257D-5 257D.VII 304D-25A 198D-29A 198D78 279Dauntless 49–52DB-7 228DC-1 209DC-2 209DC-2–125 209DC-2–142 210DC-3 235DC-5 228–229DD-91 283DD-294 297DD-343 297–298DD-476 298DD-477 298DD-478 298DD-479 298DD-480 298DD-481 298DeChevalier, Lt. Cdr. Geoffrey 269Deck park 4, 7Defender (blimp) 253, 261–262De Havilland DH-4 11De Havilland DH.60 Moth 309De Havilland DH. 80 Puss Moth 310Delphin 303Delta 215–216Designations: aircraft 319–320; airships 320;

aviation- related ships 320; aviation unit or-ganization 320–321; naval aviation abbre-viations 321

Destroyers (DD) 297–298Devastator 41–42DGA-8 238DGA-15 238DH-4 11DH-4B 10–11DH-4B-1 11DH-4M 11DH.60 309DH.80 310Dive- bombing 4, 9, 267DN-1 252–253Dolphin 198–200Doolittle, Lt. Col. James H. 276

Doolittle Raid 7, 276Dornier CsII Delphin 303–304Dornier (Wright) WP-1 308–309Douglas Aircraft Co. 17Douglas Aircraft: DT 17, C-2; FD 84; O-38

122–123; OD 114; O2D 130–131; PD 148,C-4; P3D 158–159; RD 198–200; R2D209–210; R3D 228–229; R4D 235–236;SBD 49–52; T2D/P2D 24–25; TBD 41–42,C-8

Dreadnaught 288D17S 225DT-1 17DT-2 17, C-2DT-4 17DT-6 17Duck 205–207

E-1 256Eagle, HMS 3East Coast Expeditionary Force 8Eberhart Steel Products Co. 69Eberhart Aircraft: FG/F2G 69–70Electra 174, 200–221Electra Junior 222–223Elias Aircraft: EM/EO 107–108Elias and Brother 107–108EM-1 108EM-2 107–108Enterprise (blimp) 253, 263Enterprise, USS 267, 275–276Envoy 216 –217EO-1 108Erie, USS 298Escalator clause, London Naval Treaty 4Essex, USS 268, 279

F.1 299F-1 256F-3 57–58F.VII 189F.VIII 191FA-1 80–81F2A-1 93–96F2A-2 93–96F2A-3 95–96, C-8Fairchild Aircraft: JK 217–218; J2K/GK 219;

JQ/J2Q/R2Q 192–194; R2K 218Fairchild Aircraft Mfg. Co. 193Fairchild XSOK-1 (not built) 131FB-1 62–64FB-2 64FB-3 64FB-4 64FB-5 63–65, C-3FB-6 64F.2b 105F2B-1 68–69F3B-1 70F4B-1 73–74F4B-2 74, C-5F4B-3 74F4B-4 73–75F5B-1 77–78F6B-1 85F7B-1 87F.VIIa/3M 189FC-2 194F4C-1 62F6C-1 65–66

F6C-2 65–66F6C-3 65F6C-4 65–66, C-4F7C-1 71–72F8C-1 72F8C-2 72F8C-3 72F8C-4 72–73F8C-5 73F9C-1 78F9C-2 78–79F10C-1 125F11C-1 81F11C-2 81–82F11C-3 81–82F12C-1 34–36F13C-1 88–89F13C-2 89F13C-3 88–89FD-1 84FF-1 80–81, C-6F2F-1 86F3F-1 90–91F3F-2 90–92, C-7F3F-3 91F4F-1 97F4F-2 97–98F4F-3 96 –98F4F-3A 98F4F-4 98F4F-5 98F4F-6 98F4F-7 98F4F-8 98F5F-1 98–99F6F 59F7F-1 99FG-1 69F2G-1 69–70FH-1 75Fibre Sport Plane 317Fighter Aircraft Procurement, synopsis 59Fighter units (VF, VMF) 9, 320–321First Air Brigade 283First Aviation Force 7FJ-1 76 –77FJ-2 76 –77F2J-1 83–84F3J-1 88FL-1 99–100F-5L 140–141Flag rank 326Flagship 326Fleet, Reuben 168, 186Fleet Aircraft: N2Y 196 –197Fleet Division of Consolidated Aircraft Corp.

197Fleet Marine Force (FMF) 8Fleet problems I- XXI 4, 270, 272Fleet tactics 4–7Fleetster 31Fletcher class (destroyers) 298Floatplane Fighters 4, 59, 62, 109Florida, USS 288–289Flying Deck Cruiser (CLV/CF) 295–296Flying Life Boat 138, 157–158, 198–200Fokker Aircraft: C.I 305; D.VII 304; FT-1

308; JA (Atlantic) 190–191; PJ (GeneralAviation) 157–158, C-5; TA/RA (Atlantic)188–189

Index 333

Fokker Aircraft Corp. of America 189Ford, Henry 191, 247Ford Aircraft: JR/RR 191–192, C-6Ford Motor Co., Stout Metal Airplane Div. 191Ford Reliability Tour 188Fowler, Harland D. 326Fowler flap system 166, 230, 326Franklin Aircraft: PS-2 210Frise, Leslie G. 326Frise aileron 326FT-1 89–90FU-1 109F2U-1 75–76F3U-1 36F4U-1 100–102F2W-1 315–316F2W-2 315–316F3W-1 67

G-21 226G-21A 226G-23 80G-34 99G-36A 98G-44 234G-51 99Gamma 43, 90Gannet, USS 280, 282GB-1 225–226GB-1 225–226Geiger, Gen. Roy S. 7General Aviation Aircraft: FA 80–81; PJ

157–158, C-5General Aviation Mfg. Corp. 157George E. Badger, USS 286GH-1 238GH-2 238GH-3 238Gillis, USS 286GK-1 219Glenn L. Martin Co. 151–152Goldsborough, USS 286Goodyear Airships: B- Class 253–254; C-

Class 254–256; D- Class 256 –257; E /F- Class 256; G- Class 261–262; H- Class 257–258; J- Class 258–260; K-1-Class 260–261;K-2-Class 264–265; L- Class 263–264; TC-13/-14 262–263

Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Co. 252–253Goodyear- Zeppelin Airships: ZRS-4/-5 249–

252Goodyear- Zeppelin Corp. 242, 249Goose 226 –227Goshawk 81–83Great Lakes Aircraft Corp. 32, 42–43Great Lakes Aircraft: BG 32–33; B2G 37–

39; TBG 42–43; TG 26 –27Green, USS 286Griffin, Lt. Virgil 269Grumman, Leroy, 79Grumman Aircraft: FF/SF 79–80, C-6; F2F

86; F3F 90–92, C-7; F4F 96 –98; JF/J2F205–207; J4F 234–235; JRF 226 –227;SBF 39–41; TBF 54–55

Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. 79Guadalcanal, assault on 272Gun Armament (ships) 3–4, 270, 272, 275,

293Gun spotting 4, 289, 292, 299–302Gunboats 298

H-1 257–258H-4 139H-8 139H-12 139H-16 138–139, C-1H75B 92Hall, Charles 62, 75Hall Aluminum Aircraft: FH 75; PH 148–

149, C-6; P2H 155–156; PTBH 162–163Hall Aluminum Aircraft Corp. 62, 75, 148Halsey, Fleet Adm. William F. 7Handley Page Type S (HPS) 307–308Hanriot HD.2C 300Harding, USS 283Hawk II 81Heavier- Than- Air (HTA) units 79, 252Heavy Cruisers (CA) 3, 292–295Heinkel, Ernst 307Heinkel- Caspar U.1 307Helldiver 52–53, 72–73Helena, USS 293Heron, USS 280, 282Hibbard, Hall 220HL-1 114HN-1 180–181HN-2 181, C-2HO-1 180–181Honolulu, USS 293Hornet, USS 7, 268, 275–276Howard Aircraft: GH 238H.P. Model 21 307–308HS-1 139HS-1L 139–140HS-2L 140HS-3L 140Hudson IIIA 167Huff- Daland Aircraft: HN/HO 180–181,

C-2Huff- Daland Airplane Co. 180Hulbert, USS 286Humbolt, USS 287Husky Junior 197

I-19 278I-70 275Idaho, USS 289Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) 3–5, 268Independence, USS 268, 279–280Independence class 268, 280Independent maneuvering 5Independent tactical decision- making 5Island superstructure 270, 273–274, 279–

280

J class (blimp) 253, 258–260J-1 253, 258–259J-2 253, 259J-3 253, 259–260J-4 253, 258–260JA-1 190–191James V. Martin Aeroplane Co. 106James V. Martin Aircraft: K- IV 106Japanese carrier air groups 5Jason, USS 285JB-1 225JC-1 203JE-1 204JF-1 205JF-2 206JF-3 206

J2F-1 206J2F-2 206J2F-2A 206J2F-3 207J2F-4 207J2F-5 207J2F-6 207J3F-1 226J4F-1 234–235J4F-2 235JH-1 223–224JK-1 217–218J2K-1 219J2K-2 219JL-1 207JL-6 305JN-1 177JN-1W 177JN-4B 178JN-4H 178JN-4HG 178JN-6H 178JO-1 222JO-2 222–223JO-3 222–223JQ-1 192–194J2Q-1 194JR-1 192JR-2 192JR-3 192JRB-1 232JRB-2 231–232JRB-3 232JRB-4 232JRF-1A 227JRF-2 227JRF-3 227JRF-4 227JRF-5 227JRS-1 219–220JR2S-1 164Junkers- Larsen Aircraft Corp. 305Junkers- Larsen JL-6 305Jupiter, USS 268JW-1 208–209J2W-1 221–222

K class (blimps) 253, 260–261, 264–265K-1 253, 260–261K-2 253, 264K-3 253, 264K- III 106K-4 253, 264K- IV 106K-5 253, 264K-6 253, 264K-7 253, 264K-8 253, 264K-85 127Kaydet 214–215Keystone Aircraft: OK 118–119; OL (Loen-

ing) 116; O2L (Loening) 123–124; PK152–153; SL (Loening) 120–121; S2L(Loening) 126 –127

Keystone Aircraft Corp. 152King, Fleet Adm. Ernest J. 7Kinner Aircraft: RK 216 –217Kinner Airplane & Motor Corp. 216Kitten Floatplane 106Kreider- Reisner Aircraft Corp. 218

334 Index

L Class (blimps) 253, 263–264L-1 253, 263–264L-2 253, 264L-3 264L-4 264L-5 264L-6 264L-7 264L-8 264L-8 mystery 264L-9 264L-10 264L-11 264L-12 264L-13 264L-14 264L-15 264L-16 264L-17 264L-18 264L-19 264L-20 264L-21 264L-22 264L-49 244Laddon, Issac M. “Mac” 150, 160Land- based patrol bombers 138, 167Landsdowne, Lt. Cdr. Zachary 244, 246Langley, USS 4, 267–269Langley, Samuel Pierpont 268Lapwing, USS 280, 282–283Lapwing class (small seaplane tender) 280,

282–283Level bombing attack 9Lexington, USS 3–4, 8, 267, 270–272Lexington class (fleet carrier) 3, 267, 270–

272Light Cruiser (CL) 293–294Lighter- Than- Air (LTA) program 241–242,

253; training 253; unit organization 321Lightweight observation floatplane 102, 118–

120Lightweight trainer 197–198Line astern formation 4LNS-1 238–239Lockheed Aircraft: PBO 166 –167; RO 201;

R2O 220–221; R3O 220–221; R4O 166 –167; R5O 230–231

Lockheed Aircraft Corp. 166, 220–221Lockeed Aircraft Div. of Detroit Aircraft

Corp. 201Loening, Grover C. 112Loening Aeronautical Div. of Keystone Air-

craft Corp. 113Loening Aeronautical Engineering Co. 112Loening Aircraft: OL 112–114, C-4; O2L

1234–124; SL 120–121; S2L 126 –127London Naval Treaty of 1930 3, 288, 293London Naval Treaty of 1936 4, 267, 288Long Island, USS 268, 278–279Longren Fibre Sport Plane 317Los Angeles, USS 241–242, 246 –248Loughead Aircraft Co. 140LS-1 105LZ-96 244–245LZ-126 246Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH 146

M Class (blimp) 253M-8 104–105

M-8–1 105M-8–2 105M.16 306M130 167M162A 168–169Macchi M.16 306Macon, USS, 242, 249–252Marine Air Group (MAG) 321Marine Air Wing (MAW) 321Marine Corps Air Stations (MCAS) 321Marine Corps Aircraft, Status of, December

1941 323Marine Corps Aviation, emergence of 7–8Mariner 167–169Maritime patrol mission 137–138Mars 171–173Martin Aircraft: BM (T5M) 28–29, C-6;

MBT (TM) 13–14; MO 109–110, C-2;M2O 111–112; MS 110–111; PM 151–152; P2M 153–154; P3M 153–154; PBM167–169; PB2M 171–173; T3M 21–23, C-4; T4M 25–27, C-5; T6M 29–30

Maryland, USS 288–289Matagorda, USS 287McCain, Adm. John S., 7McFarland, USS, 286MB-1 13MB-3 59–60, C-1MB-3A 60MBT 13Memphis, USS 293Messerschmitt, Willi 311Messerschmitt Bf.108b 311MF 178–179Midway, Battle of 7, 272, 276Minelayer- carrier (CM) 280–282Minesweeper (AM) 280, 282–283Minesweeper for duty with aircraft 280Mitchell, Brig. Gen. Billy 283Mitscher, Adm. Marc A. 7MO-1 109–110, C-2M2O-1 111–112Moffett, R. Adm. William A. 6 –7Monoplanes, suitability of 9, 59, 103, 137Mormacland, MS 279MS-1 110–111MT-1 13

N-9 174N-9H 174–175, C-1NA-16 224NA-18 224National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

(NACA) 327National Air Races 312National Recovery Act of 1933 274Naval Aircraft Factory (NAF) 9, 11, 14–15,

17, 24, 28–29, 102, 130, 133–134,137140–144, 147–148, 173, 181–182, 212–214,

232–233, 241, 243–244, 312, 317Naval Aircraft Factory Aircraft: F-5 (PN-5

and -6) 140–141; M-8 104–105; MercuryRacer 317–318; NM 317–318; N2N 181–182; N3N 212–214, C-7; N5N 232–233;NO 111–112; OSN 134; OS2N 133; PN-7142–144, C-3; PN-8 142–144, C-3; PN-9142–144, C-3; PN-10 142–144, C-3; PN-11 (P4N) 147–148; PN-12 142–144, C-3;PT 14–15; SON 130; TF 60–61; TN 24;T2N 28–29; TR 314–315; TS 61–62

Naval Aircraft Factory Airships: ZR-1 243–246

Naval Attaché for Air 327Naval Aviation Cadet Program (NAVCAD)

8Naval Aviation Pilot (NAP) 321Naval Aviation Training Establishment 173Naval Aviator curriculum 8Naval Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) 6 –8,

9–10, 59, 102–103, 137–138, 173, 241253, 312, 321Naval Bureau of Ships (BuShips) 267–268,

274Naval Expansion Act of 1938 267Navy Aircraft, Status of, December 1941

322Navy Department 8, 252, 267, 280, 299N2B-1 194–195NC-1 141–142NC-2 142NC-3 142NC-4 141–42, C-2NC-5 142NC-6 142NC-7 142NC-8 142NC-9 142NC-10 142N2C-1 173, 195–196N2C-2 173, 195–196Nevada, USS 288New Mexico, USS 289New York, USS 291NF-1 92–93Nieuport 28 300–301NJ-1 173, 124–125NK-1 173, 196N2M-1 182N2N-1 181–182N3N-1 173, 212–214N3N-2 213N3N-3 173, 212–214, C-7N5N-1 232–233NO-1 111–112Noa, USS 297North American Aircraft: NJ 224–225; SNJ

227–228, C-8North American Aviation, Inc. 173, 224North Carolina, USS 288North Sea Type (blimp) 252Northampton, USS 293–294Northampton class (heavy cruiser) 293–294Northrop Aircraft: BT 43–44; FT 89–90; RT

215–216Northrop Aircraft Corp. 43Norton Sound, USS 288NP-1 173, 229–230NR-1 173, 233NS-1 173, 214N2S 173, 214–215NT-1 173, 197–198NW-1 313–314NW-2 314NY-1 173, 186 –188NY-1A 173, 186,188NY-1B 188NY-2 173, 186 –188, C-5NY-2A 173, 186, 188NY-2B 188N2Y-1 196 –197

Index 335

NY-3 173, 188N3Y-1 188N4Y-1 173, 204–205

O-1 252, 302O-2 114O-38C 122–123

O2B-1 10–11, C-1OA-1A 113OA-1B 113OA-2 113Observation and Scout Aircraft Procurement,

synopsis 102–103Observation- Scout (VOS) Requirement of

1936 103, 133–135Observation unit organization (VO, VMO)

321OC-1 72OC-2 72O2C-1 73O3C-1 129–130OD-1 114O2D-1 130–131OFM (Imam) Ro. 1 309Oglala, USS 282OJ-1 119OJ-2 119OJ-3 119OK-1 118–119OL-1 112OL-2 113–113OL-3 112OL-4 112OL-5 113OL-6 116OL-7 113OL-8 113–114OL-8A 113, C-4OL-9 114O2L-1 123–124O2L-2 124Omaha, USS 293Omaha class (light cruisers) 293–294OO-1 115–116OP-1 121–122OP-2 122Operation Torch 274Osmond Ingram, USS 286OSN-1 134OS2N-1 133OSS-1 134–135Ostfriesland, SMS 283O2U-1 114–115, C-4O2U-2 115O2U-3 115O2U-4 115O3U-1 116 –117O3U-2 116O3U-3 116 –117, C-6O3U-4 116 –117O3U-5 117O3U-6 117O4U-1 120O4U-2 117O5U-1 117–118OSU-1 117–118OS2U-1 132–133, C-8OS2U-2 133OS2U-3 133OZ-1 128–129

P-1 65P-6 (catapult) 289, 293P-6E 81P-12B 74P-12E 74P-15 78P-16 83P-26 87P-35 93P-36 92P-39 100Page, Capt. Arthur 312, 318Page Racer 318Parnall Panther 302–303Patoka, USS 284–285Patrol Aircraft Procurement, synopsis 137–

138Patrol- bomber (PB) mission 137, 161Patrol- Torpedo- Bomber (PTB) Requirement

of 1934 138PB-1 144PB-2 144PBJ (B-25) 138PBM-1 167–169PBM-2 169PBM-3 169PBM-5 169PBM-5A 169PB2M-1 171–173PB2M-1R 173PBO-1 166 –167PBS-1 163–164PBY-1 159–162, C-7PBY-2 160, 162PBY-3 161–162PBY-4 161–162PBY-5 162PBY-5A 162PB2Y-1 164–165PB2Y-2 164–166, C-8PB2Y-3 165–166PB2Y-3B 165PB2Y-3R 166PB2Y-5H 166PB2Y-5R 166PB4Y (B-24) 138PCA-2 122PD-1 148, C-4P2D-1 24–25P3D-1 158–159P3D-2 158–159Pelican, USS 280, 282Pennsylvania, USS 288–289Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate 128–129Pennsylvania Aircraft Syndicate Aircraft: OZ

128–129Pensacola, USS 293PH-1 148–149PH-2 149–150PH-3 148–150, C-6P2H-1 155–156Pine Island, USS 288Pitcairn Aircraft: OP 122PJ-1 157–158, C-5PJ-2 158PK-1 152–153PM-1 151–152PM-2 151–152P2M-1 153–154P3M-1 154

P3M-2 153–154PN-5 141PN-6 141PN-7 142–143PN-8 143PN-9 143–144, C-3PN-10 144PN-11 147–148PN-12 144P2N 142P4N-1 147P4N-2 147Pocomoke, USS 281, 287–288Porte- type sponson hull 139, 143Portland, USS 293Pre- Dreadnaught 288Prohibition Act 8PS-1 145PS-2 145–146PS-2 (glider) 210P2S-1 154–155PT-1 (Consolidated) 186PT-1 (NAF) 14PT-2 (NAF) 14–15PT-6 197PT-11 204PT-13 214PT-13C 214PT-17 214PT-22 233PTBH-1 163PTBH-2 162–163Pulitzer Trophy 213PV-1 (B-34) 138, 167PW-8B 65PW-9 63PY-1 150–151P2Y-1 156 –157P2Y-2 157, C-5P2Y-3 156 –157P3Y-1 159–161P4Y-1 169–171

R34 244R38 241–243RA-3 173, 189RA-4 189Raleigh, USS 293Ranger, USS 267, 272–274Raymond, Arthur 209RC-1 201–203R2C-1 316R2C-2 316 –317R3C-1 317R3C-2 317R3C-4 317R4C-1 207–208RD 199–200RD-1 199RD-2 199–200RD-3 198–200RD-4 199–200R2D-1 209–210R3D-1 228–229R3D-2 228–229R3D-3 229R4D-1 235–236R4D-2 235–236R4D-3 236R4D-4 236

336 Index

R4D-5 236R4D-6 236R4D-7 236RE-1 203–204RE-2 203–204RE-3 203–204Reeves, Vice Adm. Joseph M. 7Reliant 211–212RK-1 216 –217R2K-1 218RO-1 201Ro.1 309R2O-1 220–221R3O-1 221R3O-2 223R4O-1 166 –167R5O-1 230R5O-2 230R5O-3 230–231R5O-4 231R5O-5 231R5O-6 231Roosevelt, Franklin Delano 6Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5a 299–300RQ-1 212R2Q 193–194R3Q-1 211–212RR-2 192, C-6RR-3 192RR-4 192RT-1 215–216Ryan Aeronautical Co. 233Ryan Aircraft: NR 233

S-1 296S2C-1 124–125S3C-1 125–126S4C-1 35Safe Airplane Contest 224St. Louis, USS 293Salisbury Sound, USS 288Sandpiper, USS 280, 282Santa Cruz Islands, Battle off 276Saratoga, USS 3–4, 267, 270–272Savannah, USS 295SBA-1 44, 46SB2A-1 53–54SB2A-2 54SB2A-3 54SB2A-4 54SBC-1 35SBC-2 35SBC-3 35–36SBC-4 34–36, C-7SB2C-1 52–53SBD-1 50–51SBD-2 51SBD-3 51–52SBD-4 51SBD-5 51SBD-6 51SBF-1 39–41SBN-1 44–46SBU-1 36 –37SBU-2 37SB2U-1 46, 48SB2U-2 48SB2U-3 47–48SB3U-1 49SCDA O-1 Airship 302

Schneider Maritime Cup 312Schweizer Aircraft: LNS 238–239Schweizer Aircraft Corp. 238Schwendler, William 226Scout- Bomber (SB) development 5, 9Scout- Bomber (SB) Requirement of 1935 9Scout- Observation (VSO) Requirement of

1933 103, 117–118, 129–131Scouting function 5Scouting unit organization (VS, VSC, VMS,

VMSB) 321SE-1 123SE-2 123S.E.5a 299–300Sea Scout (blimp) 252Seaplane Tender Procurement, Synopsis of

280–281SG-1 126SGS 2–8 239Shawmut (Oglala), USS 281–282Shenandoah, USS 241, 243–246Shokaku, IJN 272, 276Sikorsky Aero Engineering Co. 145Sikorsky Aircraft: JRS 219–220; JR2S 164;

PS 145; P2S 154–155; PBS 163–164; RS145–146; SS 127–128

Sikorsky Div. of United Aircraft Corp. 145Simoun 310–311Single- Engine Transport (G) 173Sky Dreadnaughts 138, 164–166, 171–173Skyhook arresting system 78, 197, 209SL-1 120–121SL-2 121S2L-1 126 –127SNC-1 236SNJ-1 227–228SNJ-2 228, C-8SNJ-3 227–228SNJ-4 228SNJ-5 228SNJ-6 228SNV-1 237SNV-2 237SOC-1 130SOC-2 130SOC-2A 130SOC-3 129–130SOC-4 130, C-7SO2C-1 130SO3C-1 136 –137SO3C-2 137SO3C-2C 137SO3C-3 137SOE-1 131–132SOK-1 131SON-1 130Sopwith 11/2 Strutter 301–302Sopwith F.1 Camel 299SOR-1 137SO2U-1 136 –136Spartan Aircraft: NP 229–230Spartan Aircraft Co. (Mid- Continent Div.)

229SS-1 127–128SS-2 127–128SS-105 296SSZ-23 300ST-1 18–20Stalb, Ralston 226Stearman Aircraft: NS/N2S 214–215

Stearman Div. of Boeing Airplane Co. 214Stearman- Hammond Aircraft: JH 223–224Stearman- Hammond Co. 223–224Stinson Aircraft: R3Q (RQ) 211–212Stinson Aircraft Corp. 211STK-3R 233Stout Aircraft: ST 18–20Stout Metal Airplane Co. 18–20SU-1 117SU-2 116 –117SU-3 117Submarines 296 –297Super- Dreadnaught 288Swan, USS 280, 282

TA-1 188–189TA-2 189TA-3 189Tangier, USS 287–288Tangier class (heavy seaplane tender) 287–

288TB-1 23TBD-1 41–42TBF-1 54–55TBG-1 42–43TBM-1 55TBM-3 55TBU 55–57TBY-2 57TC-13 262–263TC-14 262–263T2D-1 24–25T3D-1 30T3D-2 30Teal, USS 280, 282Tennessee, USS 288, 291Texas, USS 289TG-1 (Great Lakes) 26TG-1 (NAF) 183–184TG-2 (Great Lakes) 26 –27TG-2 (NAF) 183–184TG-3 (NAF) 183–184TG-4 (NAF) 183–184TG-5 (NAF) 183–184Thomas Morse Aircraft: MB-3 59–60Thomas Morse Aircraft Corp. 59–60Thrush, USS 280, 282Tin Bubble and Tinship 249TM-1 12–13T2M-1 21T2M-2 21T3M-1 21T3M-2 21–22, C-4T4M-1 25–27T5M-1 28–29T6M-1 29–30TN-1 24T2N 28–29Torpedo attack 4–5, 9, 267Torpedo- bombers (TB) 9, 41–42, 319Torpedo Plane (T) 9, 319TR-3 314TR-3A 314–315Transport (T/ R) 173Trapeze arresting system 242, 248, 250Treaty cruisers 293TS-1 61–62, C-2TS-2 61TS-3 61, 314Tuscaloosa, USS 295

Index 337

Two- Ocean Naval Expansion Act of 1940 6,10, 268

U.1 307U-166 235U-656 167U.S. Congress funding 6U.S. Treasury Department 8UO-1 102, 108–109, 294, C-3UO-2 109UO-3 107UO-4 109Upson, Ralph H. 249Utah, USS 288Utility category (J) 173Utility Transport (JR) 173

V-2 115V-166A 101V-166B 101VE-7 102–104VE-7G 103–104VE-7GF 103–104, C-1VE-7H 103–104VE-7S 103–104VE-7SF 103–104VE-9 103–104Vickers Viking IV 306

Viking Aircraft: OO 115–116Viking Flying Boat Co. 115Vinson- Trammel Expansion Act of 1934 6Vought Aircraft: FU 108–109; F2U 75–76;

F4U 100–102; O2U 114–115, C-4; O3U116 –118, C-6; O4U 116 –117, 120; O5U116 –117; OSU 116 –117; OS2U 132–133,C-8; SU 116 –118; SBU (F3U) 36 –37;SB2U 46 –48; SB3U 49; SO2U 135–136;TBU 55–56; UO 108–109, C-3; VE-7/-9103–104, C-1

Vultee Aircraft: SNV 237Vultee Aircraft, Inc. 237

Waco Aircraft Co. 208Waco Aircraft: JW 208–209; J2W 221–222Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 3–4, 267,

288, 293West Virginia, USS 288–289Wichita, USS 293–294Widgeon 234–235William B. Preston, USS 286Wind class (icebreakers) 298World War I 3World War II 5WP-1 308–309Wright, USS 280, 283–284Wright Aeronautical Corp. 67, 313

Wright Aircraft: F2W 315–316; F3W 67;NW 313–314; WP 308–309

XF-3 58–59XR-2800 101XS-1 110–111

Y-125 224Y-150 224Y-1M 224Y-1S 224Yorktown, USS 274–276Yorktown class (fleet carrier) 274–276

Zaikaku, IJN 272, 276Zeppelins as war reparations 241, 246ZMC-2 242, 248–249ZNN- G 261–262ZNN- L 263–264ZNP- K 264–265Zodiac- Vedette VZ- Type (blimp) 252Zodiac ZDUS- Type (blimp) 252ZR-1 241, 243–246ZR-2 241–243ZR-3 246 –248ZRCV 242, 252ZRS-4 242, 249–250, 252ZRS-5 242, 249–252

338 Index

United States Naval Aviation 1919-1941

Documents

Transcript of United States Naval Aviation 1919-1941